Double E Ticket

Political Landscaping => Domestic issues => Topic started by: lifefeedsonlife on September 01, 2009, 07:14:55 AM



Title: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 01, 2009, 07:14:55 AM
Started it there - I'll start it here!
 
What I think this really is coming down to is a question of a powerful Federal Government as opposed to giving the States more reign. I would prefer the States, though I get the impression that they're not much better in terms of fiscal responsibility (California, New York and Michigan come immediately to mind) or the ability to get things accomplished in a timely fashion. (Pennsylvania comes to mind - though I now wonder if there's a method to their madness - i.e. lowering the deficit by not funding things for a few months.)
 
The larger the centralized system, the greater the potential for getting large things done, though the greater the inertia too. ("This is a luxury liner, not a speedboat. It's going to take some time to turn it around.) What I mean is - there's a great benefit to pooling resources (Apollo comes to mind), but the drawback is who gets the resources back (which is "pork"), who is in charge of the oversight (we live in a bureaucracy - whioch creates a nice faceless "they" to blame things on), and once a project is completed - how is it kept up?
 
Anybody ever been to Moscow? Incredible architectural works . . . from a distance. Tremendous monuments to the collective might of centralized of power - which are now crumbling because there's no impetus or real responsibility (i.e. ownership) to continue upkeep. (The hot water system comes to mind. Cripes I find the prospect of something like that here utterly terrifying.)
 
I'd much rather have a majority of government functions handled at a State (or even County) level where power can better be managed by the voice of the People . . . faces and names get lost in larger systems and the 'individual' (meaning identity, creativity and freedom) becomes secondary to the collective. Collectives don't tend to pull for the individual. But transitory, 'unsystemized' groups of individuals banded together for a common cause do. Sounds contradictory but when you think about it - it isn't.
 
What I've seen happening in the federal system is a centralization of power. It started a long time ago and has really begun to come to fruition this past decade. I don't like the idea. I think it's ultimately very dangerous to identity, creativity, and freedom.
 
I am a critic of centralized power.
 
Therefore I tend towards being a critic of the Obama Administration.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 01, 2009, 08:02:15 AM
I am a supporter of the Obama Administration for a different reason: I believed that we needed to change the system too but we only had 2 choices: McCain/Palin or Obama/Biden.
 
Honestly, The McCain campaign was a disaster. The republicans continue to be divisive and outright mean (seriously, kicking Kennedy the DAY AFTER he died, come on) and right wing radio just sickens me.
 
So yes, I voted for hope & change, Call me a wide eyed optimist but I have been the cynic and living that life is depressing and cold. It's not good for my health, my soul or my country so I have to believe things will get better.
 
And things won't get better by attacking the side that won. That goes for both sides.
 
Yes, I have issues with the centralization of government and I don't agree with the current health care bill, but I think thiese are the cards we were dealt and everyone needs to positively do their part to change the process.
 
Calling people names & disrespecting our country's highest office isn't the way to go. Taking care of your immediate communities DOES make a difference.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 01, 2009, 08:06:12 AM
Well, we had the choice of the candidates from the big parties. I voted for neither of two party candidates. I took the road less traveled. My candidate was not elected and I knew he would not be. However my voice (no matter how insignificant) was heard.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 01, 2009, 08:36:21 AM
I agree NP. Voted for change by voting outside the two parties that got us here. Wish more people would see that. I agree TiFe that the McCain campaign was doomed from the start, but I think it's more because people think there's a real difference between the two money parties. They've shared power for a long long time and . . . here we are.

They share the blame, though to hear them tell it they don't. I don't disrespect the offices of power, though I don't always agree with the ideologies of those who who hold it at a given time. I find myself in disagreement more often than not over the past 5-6 years.

Not a Bush/Cheney fan. Not an Obama/Biden fan and I wasn't too hep on Mccain/Palin either.

So Libertarian candidate for me . . .

TiFe I agree 100% with your statement that taking care of your immediate communities makes a difference . . . thing is - when there are Federal / State rules and regulations that prvent adapatability to local need (remember centralization promotes uniformity) they stand in hindrance of local governments doing so.

I don't see that as effective.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 01, 2009, 10:21:20 AM
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll)

The approval numbers for the current Administration aren't looking all that good right now . . . . 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 01, 2009, 11:10:36 AM
re:social justice
 
lifeeds, ive something for you to read. the author is  liberatarian and secular.  a very acomplished political scientist to boot. i have read the full book. taken university rated courses and read many other books that another author has reccomended about political science and its history. im thinking we are living in historic times. i have taken nearly a full year to study the prerequisites to even be able to understand the concepts involved.( and i still am a dummy to some extent) understanding this in political historical perspective is not a pretty picture. social justice is "anything but" apparantly. this is telling right here: Ideology is a form of theoretical conscription: everyone, by virtue of class, sex, race, or nation, is smartly uniformed and assigned to one side or the other.  you know what, ive worn that uniform, sometimes unbeknownst to me, i think that is where a lot of americans are right now... and some wear it like wolves in sheeps clothing, some want us to wear it and fight like wolves with each other while they steal our real freedom.
 
http://www.firstprinciplesjournal.com/print.aspx?article=1105&loc=b&type=cbtp (http://www.firstprinciplesjournal.com/print.aspx?article=1105&loc=b&type=cbtp)
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 01, 2009, 01:23:59 PM
Quote
...when there are Federal / State rules and regulations that prvent adapatability to local need (remember centralization promotes uniformity) they stand in hindrance of local governments doing so.

I don't see that as effective.

I have the same problem in my work environment. We have adapted and figured out ways around the impediments. Not really truthful or honorable, but it lends itself to being effective without always fighting with a force that we don't have ant leverage with. Our country was built on this kind of adaptation & ingenuity. Short of an all out revolution, we are going to have to just be creative.
 
Taxes still suck though.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 01, 2009, 01:59:38 PM
When I look at the Federal part of the govt and consider those things that can only be done by the Fed like fixing SS, Medicare, Healthcare and the economy, Climat change ect. The disconnect is pretty apparent.
I like most citizens have a vested interest in getting the above mentioned problems fixed, and that interest is not seperated by party affiliation. Were this a business, people would be assigned to fix it, their performance would be measured primarily by success or failure. There are rewards for success, and for failure someone else would be found to fix it.
However, the politicians we have to fix these problems have vested interests that do not have fixing the problem as there primary mission.
So what we see is a split by party on any issue of import. The reason is that the vested interest of lets say the Republican politicians in the case of todays problems, is not in solving the problem, but that the Democrats fail to solve the problem. A Democrat failure enhances Republican re-election possibilities and vice versa.Both parties have had a solution for the problems, but there is rarely concensus, or even compromise.
So who benefits? Not me.
A friend proposed that we should lock them all in chambers, with their weapon of choice, (no firearms) and let them decide the issues gladiator style,last man standing wins. The casualties from both sides then get all their medical treatment for trauma at the VA.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 01, 2009, 04:50:20 PM
A friend proposed that we should lock them all in chambers, with their weapon of choice, (no firearms) and let them decide the issues gladiator style,last man standing wins. The casualties from both sides then get all their medical treatment for trauma at the VA.
 

Good one!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 01, 2009, 04:59:18 PM
Why the VA? Why not use the new health plan that's about to unfold? That might be an incentive to take a harder look at what they're about to do.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 01, 2009, 07:34:05 PM
From bh's article:
 
Quote
Ideology is to reality, I suggest, as (in Tolstoy’s opinion) the reports of battles are to the concrete experience of individuals in the field. In ideological moods, we think we see in social and political life those clear lines from the history books depicting the battle order of the antagonists in massed array. They have neat, clear names like bourgeois and proletarian, colonialist and national, city-dweller and producer, in a word, oppressor and oppressed. The actual reality, however, is messy. Things change all the time, and it becomes impossible to keep any clear and distinct identities in focus. Confronting the arguments of ideology, we are forced to transform the Stendhalian question: Is it really a battle that we are in?

There's nothing new under the sun is there?
 
I think sometimes we invent storms and thunder because it's our nature to do so.
 
Thing is - the bottom line in the undertakings we pursue is effectiveness. Does it work? Ideology aside, from the lions' pride, the bees' hive, to New York City - is this a way to live that works within the constructs fo the environment we're in? I'd say yes to the pride and the hive . . . so far . . . and maybe even the city, but I would say prides and hives have withstood a greater test of time.
 
Personally - it's in my nature to question and prod. I like to test . . . whether it's "allowed" or not. In my lifetime I've been a "fan" of a number of so-called ideologies - but my fanclub memeberships have changed as I've gained experience.
 
Perhaps I'm an "anti-ist" . . . which just makes me another kind of "ist" in the end according to that author.
 
Am I in a battle?
 
Only the ones I choose to fight in . . . .   


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 01, 2009, 08:49:02 PM
typical definitions for ideology in this instance will not fit, as americans we make claim on the verbiage and twist it to our political or religious uses if we fancy. the author was talking of political ideology in its root form as a vehicle of social change with karl marxx being the chief paradigm, but not limited to that. (see  wicki for a overwiew but stick with poly sci sources) 

so, the psychological, social and collective elements of centralized govt, social engineering, and etc.. are not good. it is "ideology" not so simply put" it has come around many times in history.    it has lots of telltale markers, they look different each time they reappear but still have the same markers... that was my point...and the point of the article.   im pretty sure   you are supposed to "inquire, ask , seek, TEST.. i would advise it. that was what prompted me to go outside my comfort zone.

one paragraph that i think would sum up ideology nicely is this, 

ideology is a story about losing and regaining  the human identity told in an ironical tone. irony distances  ideologues from the suffering and ugliness of the human condition, allowing them to look down from the world at a beautiful height.(when forming their theories) political society is  thus judged from an impossible standard, the anarchist utopia, and found hopelessly wanting. whereas religions promise heaven in the next life, ideologies promise heaven on earth. 

it is easy to see marxx's socialist ideas in this light, but perhaps less likely to see how any western govt could promise utopia, or something close.. or is it?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 01, 2009, 09:27:00 PM
Quote
whereas religions promise heaven in the next life, ideologies promise heaven on earth. 

I like that. I like the way the pilgrims lived their faith and to an extent, I like what the Amish do. Without my faith I would be a seriously cynical dude.

The problem is we all can't check out of this society (like the Indians or the Amish), and we are stuck with a system that seems to be more and more dysfunctional every day. What's the answer? Although I lean Libertarian, I don't think that party would help much. We really need a grass roots effort to fundamentally change the laws in our favor, first at the local level, then move up the chain.

I would love to have a degree in law right now, and have the time to make a difference and change bad law. I have seriously considered running for local office but don't have the money to throw around (another serious flaw in our election process, only the privileged can afford to 'serve'),
Wasn't that what campaign finance was originally for?

woah, need sleep, peepers are shutting down...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 01, 2009, 10:45:32 PM
I don't think all those that run for elected office set out to be products of the "system". I believe , for the most part that they did have some ideal to make a difference. It's just that the priveleges of the system are overwhelming or seductive, and can engulf anyone.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 02, 2009, 06:49:38 AM
Mr. Rogers is wise.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on September 02, 2009, 07:16:17 AM
And it's another beautiful day in the neighborhood...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 03, 2009, 07:09:28 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/03/white-house-withdraws-students-help-obama/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/03/white-house-withdraws-students-help-obama/)
 
Quote

"President Obama's plan to inspire the nation's schoolchildren with a video address next week erupted into controversy Wednesday, forcing the White House to pull out its eraser and rewrite a government recommendation that teachers nationwide assign students a paper on how to "help the president," the Washington Times reported.
 
Presidential aides acknowledged the White House helped the U.S. Education Department craft the proposal, which immediately was met by fierce criticism from Republicans and conservative organizations who accused Obama of trying to politicize the education system.
 
White House aides said the language was an honest misunderstanding in what was supposed to be a inspirational, pro-education message to America's youths.
 
Among the activities the government initially suggested for prekindergarten to sixth-grade students: that they "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president."
 
Another task recommended for students immediately after listening to the speech: to engage in a discussion about what "the president wants us to do."

 
Yeah . . . they backed off that real quick, especially in light of some of the things that Bill Ayers (and Mr. Obama himself) have said and been involved with in the education system in years past. They WANT to politicize it.
 
Quote
the two “worked as a team to advance the CAC agenda,” which “flowed from Mr. Ayers’s educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism.”

 
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2008/09/23/barack-obama-bill-ayers-stanley-kurtz-makes-connection (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2008/09/23/barack-obama-bill-ayers-stanley-kurtz-makes-connection)
 
In the past (as I said) I was attracted to radical political philosphy (must be the anarchist in me) and Bill Ayers is an individual I read about.
 
Do the American people really know the person they elected?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 03, 2009, 07:30:40 AM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/02/wh-withdraws-call-students-help-obama/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/02/wh-withdraws-call-students-help-obama/)

The original Washington Times article. Inclusive of spin from both sides.

So - what do you all think?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 03, 2009, 07:38:36 AM
Were there any 'suggestions' for the kids or were they supposed to write whatever they thought? Although it seems like a feeble attempt to revive Camelot in the wake ofg Ted's death, I think engaging the youth of America could be a good thing.
 
Now if they are specifically indoctrinating them with left wing ideology, put on the brakes. I think the problem is that most kids DON'T have any idea how our government works.
 
Like when I ran for student council in the 3rd grade on the platform "Chocolate Milk in the Water Fountains".
 
I agree about Ayers though, I have been around academians for a long time & on top of being fiercely anti-religion, I think their moral compass is broken too.
 
Haven't past presidents done this sort of thing before? I am thinking Kennedy and Clinton.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 03, 2009, 07:45:42 AM
Quote
Not everyone was outraged by the president's decision to send a videotaped message to America's schoolchildren something President George H.W. Bush did 18 years ago, though without the accompanying homework.

Thanks. I agree with the comment about the shrill attacks. The right doesn't even hide it anymore. Please, they asked us for 8 years to 'get behind' the president even if we disagreed, and Rush/Hannity/Beck/Levin have eviscerated Obama since day 1. Real mature.
 
Let the kids do a civics paper. In school uniforms.  ;D 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 03, 2009, 08:30:09 AM
[quote[] Let the kids do a civics paper. In school uniforms. [/quote]

That I'm cool with!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 03, 2009, 08:32:08 AM
"Shrill Attacks" Good one... No one here perhaps remembers OLBERMANN, BILL MAHER, AL FRANKEN, MSNBC, AIR AMERICA... on and on and on.... EVISCERATION!!!!.. another good one. What is good about viewers of both sides.... maybe they should TURN OFF all those mentioned... but..... CHECK the ratings.... FOX has KILLED MSNBC and many others with the viewer numbers... Sit down take a breath and then honestly ask yourself why??? Air America has always gasped for the cash to keep it alive and the others have low numbers. WHO watches FOX??? Methinks almost EVERYONE.
 
Fact is ... liberal and even progressive doesn't sell as much as conservative and independent. Even Dobbs is doing great on CNN... Go figure.
 
 
 
Quote
Not everyone was outraged by the president's decision to send a videotaped message to America's schoolchildren something President George H.W. Bush did 18 years ago, though without the accompanying homework.

Thanks. I agree with the comment about the shrill attacks. The right doesn't even hide it anymore. Please, they asked us for 8 years to 'get behind' the president even if we disagreed, and Rush/Hannity/Beck/Levin have eviscerated Obama since day 1. Real mature.
 
Let the kids do a civics paper. In school uniforms.  ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 03, 2009, 12:57:21 PM
Quote
OLBERMANN, BILL MAHER, AL FRANKEN, MSNBC, AIR AMERICA

I actually never watched them for more than a few minutes because it was just as you described, just attacking and sophomoric humor. I actually listened to Hannity/Beck/OReilly for a while (Rush & Levin are just paranoid fear-mongers)  :shocked: until I just got tired of the same old "it's his / her fault and America should listen to ME".  :deadhorse: All the while hiding behind Reagan & the "conservative" flags, all the while doing the same thing as the Libs: COMPLAINING and not DOING. :rant:
 
Oh, yeah, Hannity has a cool little concert he manages. I liked the Jams they used to have in stadiums. Getting a lot of people together that think the same way.
 
I don't think ratings tell the story. If that mattered Michael Jackson would be president.  :hand: I prefer to get my news from multiple sources & triangulate the data to see if it's truthful. I didn't buy into global warming and I hate nancy pelosi, but that doesn't make me a republican: I liked what Kennedy did & I believed the democrats had a better platform this election. That doesn't make me a democrat: It makes me a voter that looked at the information presented & tried to make a choice not based on "ideology".
 
I didn't think Bush was that bad, at first. I think that Cheney was the puppeteer for a while and GW pushed back toward the end. I didn't agree with GW when he started all the stimulus and bailout madness, and I still don't agree with some of CONGRESS's decisions.
 
But we need to start making the right choice in our neighborhoods, cities, townships, counties & states and stop watching the talking nimrods on the boob toob.
 
Think positive, act responsibly & if you don't have anything good to say about someone, don't say it.
 
Wise words from many wise people in my past. I still struggle with that philosophy but I STILL TRY.
 
OLBERMANN, BILL MAHER, AL FRANKEN, MSNBC, AIR AMERICA Rush/Hannity/Beck/Levin/Oreilly  :asshat:
 
Just turn 'em off & put on some classical music. Maybe some Neil Diamond.
Smile at the person in the car next to you. ;D
Be the next cool coke commercial & make the world smile. ;D
 
Be a Sparkle Pony  in someones life, :thumbsup: create some rainbows.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 03, 2009, 03:44:03 PM
re: talking heads

maybe the "emperor has no clothes"  (or is walking around in his skivvies at very best)  and belittlement of the folks or talking heads that point it out really does not do much to  put clothes on the emperors  back..  know what i mean?

re: rainbows and ponies lol

hermitage, tifemb has a long standing tradition of producing rainbows and ponies on this board. it is his stress reliever. (long story from nearly the inception of this board when there was just  a few of us) heck, he even threw in a few unicorns once. some of us cant see them, and some do apparently.  for tife's sake ive tried but come up blind to them,  lol  (love ya tife, you know i do)  :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 03, 2009, 04:28:14 PM
Quote
  ...and belittlement of the folks or talking heads that point it out really does not do much to  put clothes on the emperors  back.. 

 
BH: Once again you crystalized my thoughts exactly.
 
Quote
Yep that will do it! That will take care of everything! ([url]http://forum.eeticket.com/Smileys/default/huh.gif[/url])

 
But the outlook on life can take of SOMETHING and that's what I'm trying to say.
 
Off to help people get in better shape!
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 03, 2009, 05:12:01 PM
hermitage, maybe you missed my intended point. i was explaining in a very nice way that i "dont see tife's ponies", he and i do not agree most times on political matters. i was merely explaining how we use humor and metaphor between us to diffuse things. 

if you do a search on the board about ponies and rainbows you will see what i am talking about. i guess i was more trying to finesse tife's style to you. i apologize. i have communicated with tife for two years on this board and we have developed a re-pore about our differences.  , i hoped to convey what a decent guy tife is and yes he probably does have differing views than you, he has  differing ones than i do but we have learned how to work with it. i just wanted to expalin the rainbows and ponies thing, i meant no disrespect to you  or your point.

i apologize to all involved.  either i am totally inept at explaining myself or my posts are being  interpreted completely at will. 


 

 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 03, 2009, 06:08:10 PM
its all cool hermitage.  see, now we have a metaphor too. pink elephants. lol

i really do love tife and his family, a good guy. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 03, 2009, 06:43:41 PM
I haven't seen the sparkle ponies OR pink elephants since 1985, but my life was much different then.  ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 03, 2009, 07:29:21 PM
Thing is - when I was 'old enough' to have some fairly well formed political opinions, I did not like Carter, nor any other President that followed. None of 'em. Not Reagan, H.W., Clintom nor W. I didn't like Reagan cuz I was really into Abby Hoffman and the Chicago Seven at the time. (Had a copy of the Anarchist's Cookbook to boot - though I didn't steal it - it was more an affectation than anything.) Didn't like H.W. cuz of his career politician status and privilege. Didn't like Clinton because he was too prgressive and downright smug. (Thought Perot woulda been cool - save for the paranoia.) Didn't like W. cuz quite frankly - he was dumb. Woulda been like voting for one of my dopier Fraternity Brothers.

I don't like Obama for a much different reason. I don't like the company he's conspicuously kept and the "ideas" behind his governance.

Social Justice by their definition is an oxymoron.

I'm a social worker by trade - and I don't buy what they're selling . . . not one iota . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 03, 2009, 07:45:10 PM
life, what is your opinion of william f. buckley. would you respect his intellect in regard to political thought?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 03, 2009, 08:35:54 PM
Hermitage: All's cool, I was probably projecting a bit because I tend to get real cynical about things (hey, I grew up in Meadville, whaddya expect?  ;)  )
I CHOOSE to see sparkle ponies (from my 5 year old daughter) and rainbows (we get a lot down here because of the thunderstorms). I PERSONALLY focus on the positive in an increasingly negative world, because there are enough negative people without manners out there already. If I can make one person ha :) ppy every day I feel like I won. Lately, believe it or not, I make a lot of people smile. Sometimes that's the only thing that gets me through the week.
Yea, I lean left only because I haven't had much luck during the republican administrations (I actually shook Nixon's hand as a kid). I also lean heavily right on a lot of issues (family, religion). So it's hard to pigeonhole myself.
I support the OFFICE of the president, my God implores me to (respect for leadership). I did my best during the Bush years. What's odd is that Obama doesn't make the laws,congress does. They were elected because the republicans dropped the ball on a number of issues. So the pendulum swung WAY left. If the current leadership in the Republican party continues it's ranting it's going to get worse before it gets better.
I don't want this healthcare plan to pass, but my healthcare costs are terrible & I have GOOD insurance.
Again, grass roots efforts are what's needed, not name calling.
 
I really wish Hillary would have won... ;D
Welcome Hermitage, good to have ya here.
 
I really should get back to work... :no:


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 03, 2009, 08:45:35 PM
I'm so tired of the disrespect of the office of President itself!  I don't care if you don't like the man or what he is doing.  There are a lot of people who didn't like Bush, Clinton, Daddy Bush, and Reagan, but they did not blatantly disrespect the office. 

It saddens me to think that when the President addresses the children of the United States, that people will deny their children the right to see it.   When I was in elementary school, I would have been so excited to think that the President was speaking to me!! We complain about there not being enough roll models.  You might not like his politics, but you can't deny his public status and if he encourages even ONE child to work a little harder, then he has been successful!

On Tuesday, Sept. 8, President Barack Obama will deliver a national address to students via the Web and C-SPAN to encourage students to set high academic goals and to do their best to succeed in school. The address will be broadcast live on the White House Web site ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/ (http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/) ) and on C-SPAN at 12:00 p.m., ET. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 03, 2009, 09:51:26 PM
Well said Kim.  If what I am reading and hearing is true, this sounds like a super positive speech.  If parents are THAT concerned, maybe they can keep their kids home that day or go to school and watch it WITH them, but they should still watch.  And talk about it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 03, 2009, 10:17:41 PM
I want to be in Kimmi's class!!

(I'll bring chocolate...)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 03, 2009, 11:34:49 PM

It saddens me to think that when the President addresses the children of the United States, that people will deny their children the right to see it. ................. 
 You might not like his politics, but you can't deny his public status and if he encourages even ONE child to work a little harder, then he has been successful! 
thats so correct. Parents encourage their kids to write to Santa, Make cash deals with the Toothe Fairy, and Anticipate the Easter Bunny and the sugar buzz, but avoid the President because he might try to recruit them to an ideology. Thats truly a sad commentary.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 04, 2009, 07:00:57 AM
I think that what I find most interesting about all of this is that there are school boards that are making the decision not to show this. Why is this odd? They are the teachers of our young that will be ingraining US history into their heads and how the first amendment is a fundamental right. Yet they as a government body will be practicing censorship of the highest office in the country.

I'm not a fan of Obama but I respect the office. However, don't think he's going to be telling the kids anything that's unethical, immoral, etc. I remember seeing some broadcasts in school of presidential addresses (mostly Nixon, Ford and Carter). Granted the situation was and the times were different. But if someone had pulled the plug on any of their speeches because someone on the board though were a crook or they were against advancing nuclear energy a disservice would have been done to me. We send our kids to school to be taught by teachers that have different political and moral viewpoints than we do and the kids spend more time with them than Obama will.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 04, 2009, 07:12:32 AM
Do we think our children are so freakin' moronic that they can't watch the president speak and draw a conlusion with some intelligent discussion/input from a respected adult in their life?  That is, an adult who can be fair and non-biased IN REGARDS TO that particular speech.  (Forget about your personal opinion about him for a moment.)   Geeeez.  It's just a "get good grades and work hard and you have a shot at success" talk.   He's not going to get on national television and play the record backwards to drill future voting instructions into the gray matter.  People need to get a grip.  My 11 and 15 y.o. will be watching if that is what their schools decide to do.  I am recording it.  We will chat about it.

Bush made a habit or reading a story to elementary classrooms on a regular basis.  I wonder if people freaked out and said "Oh No!  A strange is coming to read a story!" 

Drama queens I say.     


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 04, 2009, 07:24:12 AM
Hermitage I respect your opinions and of course like the old saying goes "Opinions are like assholes..."  I'm going to try and address a few of your finer points here.

first off you must earn respect it does not just come because you won an office,

Now that is interesting because the military does not have that luxury.  When the new Commander in Chief is elected, he is now in charge and respected.  I don't ever remember another President who has had to prove himself as much of Obama in order to receive the respect he is entitled to. 

You want to be in a class with a teacher that once said in a prior post the she laughs at local news ??? ...wow way to stay in touch in what is happening in your local community

I don't live in the community anymore.  The Meadville Tribune is nothing but a gossip column.  Who's getting a divorce?  Who had a baby out of wedlock?  Who died?  and Who was arrested?  Those are the finer points of the Meadville Tribune.  If you want news, that is not the place to find it.

I would like to say that if I am able to read the text before hand and do not see a problem I would let my  children watch.

If I had known that I could have requested Bush's speeches prior to his appearances, I would have done that too.  My red pen would have been on fire!

Enjoy your Labor Day weekend folks!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 04, 2009, 07:26:43 AM
Interesting choices of words..."I just got tired of the same old "it's his / her fault and America should listen to ME." You say this about the PUNDITS on TV but have you listened to BAM-BAM, JO-BI, Pe-LOOSEY, and her lapdog Reid, not to mention the famous "Brother" Gibbs. They do the same things you blame pundits for and THEY ARE IN CHARGE!!! OMG!!! POTUS and the whole crew keep blaming their dailey shortcomings on the "PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION"... When will BAM-BAM take the load.... maybe sometime before the END of his term???  If you want to eliminate what you are tired of ... perhaps you should have to go to an island with no media at all. To say the Conservatives just do the "blame game" .... means you have never listened to the above mentioned crew.
 
Step up BAM-BAM, this is your show now. With Majority in the House and Senate, and all of those Czars.... something good should have happened already.  ???


Oh... and RATINGS for the print,sound and video media are just as important as the more famous POLLS that are on this administration. Blow them off all you want, but numbers DO count and you can bet everyone who has these on them ...watch them closely and act on them. They are a measure of $$$ as well as VOTES.

 
Quote
OLBERMANN, BILL MAHER, AL FRANKEN, MSNBC, AIR AMERICA

I actually never watched them for more than a few minutes because it was just as you described, just attacking and sophomoric humor. I actually listened to Hannity/Beck/OReilly for a while (Rush & Levin are just paranoid fear-mongers)  :shocked: until I just got tired of the same old "it's his / her fault and America should listen to ME".  :deadhorse: All the while hiding behind Reagan & the "conservative" flags, all the while doing the same thing as the Libs: COMPLAINING and not DOING. :rant:
 
Oh, yeah, Hannity has a cool little concert he manages. I liked the Jams they used to have in stadiums. Getting a lot of people together that think the same way.
 
I don't think ratings tell the story. If that mattered Michael Jackson would be president.  :hand: I prefer to get my news from multiple sources & triangulate the data to see if it's truthful. I didn't buy into global warming and I hate nancy pelosi, but that doesn't make me a republican: I liked what Kennedy did & I believed the democrats had a better platform this election. That doesn't make me a democrat: It makes me a voter that looked at the information presented & tried to make a choice not based on "ideology".
 
I didn't think Bush was that bad, at first. I think that Cheney was the puppeteer for a while and GW pushed back toward the end. I didn't agree with GW when he started all the stimulus and bailout madness, and I still don't agree with some of CONGRESS's decisions.
 
But we need to start making the right choice in our neighborhoods, cities, townships, counties & states and stop watching the talking nimrods on the boob toob.
 
Think positive, act responsibly & if you don't have anything good to say about someone, don't say it.
 
Wise words from many wise people in my past. I still struggle with that philosophy but I STILL TRY.
 
OLBERMANN, BILL MAHER, AL FRANKEN, MSNBC, AIR AMERICA Rush/Hannity/Beck/Levin/Oreilly  :asshat:
 
Just turn 'em off & put on some classical music. Maybe some Neil Diamond.
Smile at the person in the car next to you. ;D
Be the next cool coke commercial & make the world smile. ;D
 
Be a Sparkle Pony  in someones life, :thumbsup: create some rainbows.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 04, 2009, 07:36:23 AM
Quote
life, what is your opinion of william f. buckley. would you respect his intellect in regard to political thought?

I liked Buckley cuz he was a thinker. (Liked him after my anit-Reagan phase of course, but that's cuz I really wasn't a thinker at the time. Just a poseur - though if you'd have said that to me, we'd have fought about it.) He was also a decent fellow who liked to talk to people about ideas. He was Libertarian in some respects as well. (Had some interesting ideas on the legalization of marijuana for being the father of the Reagan conservative revolution.)
 
He was also the kind of fellow (from what I understand) who would have people to his dinner party whom he completely disagreed with yet treated them to his best food and wine and never disrespected them. The man knew civility and used his wit - not his emotions - to argue a point.
 
Anyone with civility and a decent wit has my respect.
 
=========================================================================
 
Getting back to the earlier topic about this school thing. If the intention of the address to the children is to inspire them to greater success, That's OK. In fact that's great! A leader should inspire the people who put him in power! The problem is - there's a lot of folks out there with a cynical cast towards our President. (And the original text of of the "lesson plan" is not what it says right now. It's been revised to remove some of the more . . . um . . . 'directive' stuff.)
 
Though I'm not so sure about the cynicism as much as fear . . . question is - is it reasonable?
 
There is an axiom about knowing people by the company they keep. If you see someone hanging out with a certain crowd -it's a pretty safe bet that they are either a part of that crowd, wanna-be's with the crowd, or are trying to change the crowd. There are special advisors and czars in President Obama's circle that have "ideologies" (ya killed that word for me bh  :D ) that stand in direct opposition to the Constitutional principles of our country.
 
I don't think he's trying to change that particular crowd he's surrounded himself with - so what are the other options?
 
There's a lot of paper and sound bytes out there about Van Jones - a lot of it what he's said and what he believes. He's now very close to the individual who holds the highest office of this land. Is this something we can be comfortable with? Cass Sunstein is another interesting individual - with some pretty specific ideas about things - as is John Holdren. (Ever read some of his paper trail?)
 
William Ayers is not a dead horse either. Read his philosophy on politicizing young children through the educational system. It's out there on paper and on tape. He's got close associations with Cass Sunstein as well as Mr. Obama.
 
Granted - the President Obama promised change . . . but is it really the change we need?
 
In a Democracy - that's up to the people. Which is a wonderful thing save for a drawback.
 
A choice is not a choice unless it is an informed choice.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 04, 2009, 08:10:50 AM
Hold up.  I did not call anyone an asshole.  As the saying goes "OPINIONS are like assholes.  Everyone has one". 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 04, 2009, 08:54:14 AM
I'm still bringin' Kimmi chocolates because it makes her HAPPY.
 
Quote
I do think that the parents should make the choice in what their children watch at school

Our school sent out the waiver form, parents are free to 'politicize' this address as much as they feel necessary.
 
Hermitage: I understand you have some issues with the way liberals and Obama make decisions and are ruining your life. But really, WHY do you let that CONSUME YOUR VERY BEING?
 
I know nothing about you other than your rants against the 'establishment' and how they are ruining your country.
 
I know nothing about YOU.
 
So I probably have nothing much more to say because, if I were at a party with you, and this is all you talked about, I would walk away & find someone a bit happier to talk with.
 
Oh, and please comment on how I am 'ignoring' the problems and how I am 'checked out'. Again, you are so busy attacking what you don't like that you haven't spent the time & energy to get to know all the fine people here and find out what you LIKE.
 
So you don't know me. And you haven't given me the opportunity to know you.
 
And that makes the Sparkle Pony  sad (sorry, I just couldn't resist: it's Friday & I'm in Love)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 04, 2009, 08:56:52 AM
*hijack*

I think that's the happiest Robert Smith has ever felt.

*end hijack*


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 04, 2009, 10:08:47 AM
Dont let the kids watch any Eagles footbal games. With Vick its just too controversial and even political and maybe ideological.
It appears all aspects of our lives are being divided by political ideology or dogma. Religion, sports,education,politics, even the choice of cars(union-non-union) , TV, who to hate ect. Who is doing that?
Well if you think about it, its the politicians and political parties.
TiFeMb 's party analogy is correct. We are being told to hate the half of Americans who have a different political/Life perspective than ourselves. They deserve no consideration, respect, or rights. How do you know that? Read the news, or watch it on TV, or be on a Forum, go to church, listen to a politician. Hate and intolerence are the great organizers of the masses.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 04, 2009, 11:00:30 AM
Hold up.  I did not call anyone an asshole.  As the saying goes "OPINIONS are like assholes.  Everyone has one".
Kimmi---I know that is why I  ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
 
Also when you are in the Military you are there as a worker, it is a Job. So you know what is expected of you when you Join...Just like any other job..even if you do not like or agree with what your bosses do or say you show them respect...so far I do not work for the POTUS.
 
Tife I am not sure that I have done any rantting here. So you are right you do not know me and if you did you would fine out that I am a great person to know and would do almost anything for anyone. As for someone running my life you are right it is ME...and yes I am a happy person and love what I do, just because I do not agree with someone does not make me an unhappy person. I do not have a problem with anyone on here as I have stated before! I enjoy what you have to post and will continue to read all posts and will enjoy..I have said before that I probably will not always agree with everyone. With that said I hope that you do not hold anything against me Tife or Kimmi because I am sure we will agree on something down the road! :) 

Not that I hold this opinion but it sounds like you are saying that if you don't belong to something, you don't need to respect it.  I'm not in the military.  Should I stop respecting it?  You live in this country!  Respect all that is American. No one said you had to respect the man.  However, you should respect the position.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: MoreLove on September 04, 2009, 11:08:15 AM
Geeeez.  It's just a "get good grades and work hard and you have a shot at success" talk.   He's not going to get on national television and play the record backwards to drill future voting instructions into the gray matter.  People need to get a grip. 

I agree, Cindy Lou.  Geez, you would think that Charlie Manson was giving a video speech to school children the way some people are acting!  Some folks sure get bent out of shape over differences of opinion/ideology.

I remember when the Dixie Chicks got death threats....death threats!!!...because of the comment one of them made about being ashamed that Pres Bush was from TX.

It's a sad state of affairs when some parents will not allow their children to hear a speech given by the POTUS.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 04, 2009, 12:19:40 PM
I'm on the Repukes side with this.  What was to originally be in the speech is disturbing!

If education is so important then schools should be teaching instead of showing speeches!

And if this speech is so important then it should be given in the evening so everybody, or at least most everybody, can watch it!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 04, 2009, 12:45:10 PM
For many reasons I never became a writer so I appreciate when one so eloquently puts my thoughts into prose. Here is an op-ed piece I ran across:
 
* begin snip *
 
How about this: Instead of "opting out of allowing our children to listen to an address by the president of the United States, what if we all “opt in” instead?
You know, do some parenting. Sit with them, listen to what the president says and then have a conversation about what he says and what you believe. Talk about how you feel, what you believe and why you think the president is right or wrong. Do it in a civil, respectful way of the presidency, even if you don't like this president's policies.

That’s parenting. As I’ve written before, I didn’t vote for President Obama, primarily because I disagreed with his ideas on health care. I agree with the goals, not the details. I said it then and it is still true.
But more people voted for President Obama than for Sen. John McCain. Obama won. That’s how it works. Usually.
Now that he is the president, he is the president. Nothing more, nothing less.
The president’s desire to speak to school children across the nation in a single address in all the schools is a novel idea and has political opponents demonizing his intent. There are reports of entire schools opting out.
There was a time when schools were viewed as places where education would occur, where ideas from all sides could be discussed and dissected, not dismissed. Now we simply eliminate thought. When the list of things we can’t talk about grows longer than the list of what we can talk about, we might as well shut the buildings down and turn off the lights. The party’s over. 
In blogs, message boards, radio talk shows and mainstream media the president of the United States is being called both a fascist and a socialist, although I don’t think you can be both at the same time. But we’ve stopped teaching civics and government, so no one remembers the difference.
The casual use of words like Nazi and fascist to described the president is inappropriate and ignorant, disrespecting the families of the millions upon millions of people killed by the Nazis, including the more than 6 million murdered in concentration camps. 
This is getting way out of hand; the rhetoric is outlandish, even nonsensical, bordering on hysterical. I disagree with some of his politics, but President Obama is none of these things. He is a liberal Democrat whose ideas were placed before the American people and won the vote.
The way to defeat his ideas is with better ones, not “opting out” of the discussion, hiding behind walls of name calling.
When we can’t see beyond the politics to allow children to listen to the president of the United States, fear and hate have won and our country has lost.
So, parents, think it through before you sign that paper opting out. Think about what you are truly opting out of.

* end snip *
 
Nice. I just want civil discourse & it has been so long since we had this. And George Bush NEVER had the hatred thrown his way that Barack Obama has.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 04, 2009, 12:47:11 PM
*hijack*
Quote
I think that's the happiest Robert Smith has ever felt.

I knew you would catch that. nice.
 
* end hijack *
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 04, 2009, 12:53:50 PM
I would ask the op-ed writer how a parent can sit with their kid and watch the speech when he's giving it during the hours that they will be in school?  Maybe that's what all of the parents who are keeping their kids home that day are gonna do, lol.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 04, 2009, 03:58:32 PM
There isn't aschool on the planet - that I'm aware of - where a parent is not welcometo sit in on their childs class, at any time they want to.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 04, 2009, 04:00:29 PM
Quote
life, what is your opinion of william f. buckley. would you respect his intellect in regard to political thought?

 
I liked Buckley cuz he was a thinker. (Liked him after my anit-Reagan phase of course, but that's cuz I really wasn't a thinker at the time. Just a poseur - though if you'd have said that to me, we'd have fought about it.) He was also a decent fellow who liked to talk to people about ideas. He was Libertarian in some respects as well. (Had some interesting ideas on the legalization of marijuana for being the father of the Reagan conservative revolution.)
 
He was also the kind of fellow (from what I understand) who would have people to his dinner party whom he completely disagreed with yet treated them to his best food and wine and never disrespected them. The man knew civility and used his wit - not his emotions - to argue a point.
 
Anyone with civility and a decent wit has my respect.
 
 
There is an axiom about knowing people by the company they keep. If you see someone hanging out with a certain crowd -it's a pretty safe bet that they are either a part of that crowd, wanna-be's with the crowd, or are trying to change the crowd. There are special advisors and czars in President Obama's circle that have "ideologies" (ya killed that word for me bh  :D ) that stand in direct opposition to the Constitutional principles of our country.
 

Granted - the President Obama promised change . . . but is it really the change we need?
 

 



ok, i admit i posted a tiny bit of 400 page book , take a some time to watch buckley and minogue (the anuthor) discuss it. that book was written about 20 years ago.  it will frame  what is going on now.. to a "T" what you are describing you see within the administration. it is IDEOLOGY and it is against freedom and liberty.  i will post the first  10 minute part there are 6 parts. it is highly intellectual so you wont hear it expressed in terms on the nightly news, but i know you will see it.  i am not very good at expressing it. i read the book and it took this video for me to finally understand the book better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CIOSkrfRC4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CIOSkrfRC4&feature=related#normal)


there are 6 parts to this, i cant link all six or this post will be HUGE, just double click the you tube link and you can get all 6...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 04, 2009, 04:12:29 PM
It couldn't be aired next Wednesday evening because that's the big health care national address time. I guess it's media day for him.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 04, 2009, 08:56:46 PM
I have read many posts on other forums critical of the public education system in this country. That it failing based on drop out rates, or tested grades , or union interference, or bad curicilum, poor teacher performance. or whatever.
Yet all of a sudden it is remarkebly successful in politicizing the entire student population, destroying their moral grounding, polluting their political orientation because the President of the United States will make a televised address to the students.
This remarkable transformation from abject failure, to an awsome success,and it  did not take place in a 180 day school year, or a month, or week or day, but in an hour.
How do you explain that?
From my personal experience as a student, and a parent of students, I would suspect their hearing a speach by any politician would be about #50 on their list of things they wanted to do on any given day, and the chance that anything they might say as actually having as apocalyptic effect on me/them is about as likely as hitting the lottery.
Unremarked on in all this is that a Foreign owned, and Foreign controlled network would broadcast a remark that the President of the United State's speech to American students would be politicized attempt to corrupt American youth, and people get in an uproar.
So if I should accuse some on this forum by name of being latent serial killers, or blatent child molesters, should I have to prove they are, or should they have to prove they are not. What is Fox's responsibility?


 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 04, 2009, 10:19:53 PM
do you think the citizens take their cues from  the media and are infulenced on how to feel or the media just report what the mood ot the people happens to be.


do you think the dynamic is the same for a fox viewer as a cnn  nbc or a msnbc viewer? or any other cable or mainstream source of news.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 06, 2009, 11:40:34 AM
so, the age of czars. 

well, it appears van jones the green jobs czar has resigned. if you only watched nbc, msnbs  abc, cbs, and in some cases cnn, you might not even know there was an issue. and for sure you would have seen a different picture than fox news showed. i monitored all of them and a few more, i figure between all of them i can glean facts , i dont care where they come from.   mr van jones still insists he is the victim of a smear campaign. many people think because glenn beck "outed" him there is no reason to believe any of the reports.  so,  lets look at responsibility here too.

Quote
"Who's the real terrorists? Uncle Sam." That according to a record put out by Freedom Fighter Music, a label created by the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, which Van Jones founded. There are a number of different voices on the record, including that of convicted cop-killer Mumia Abu Jamal and Van Jones himself. One of the voices accuses the United States government of "Fighting terror with terror, bombing babies in the night." And then Van Jones appears for his cameo (at the 3:50 mark). Jones rants against the "Israeli occupation," calls for the right of return of the Palestinian people and then puts himself squarely on the side of America's enemies: "This is now a global struggle against a U.S.-led security apparatus and military agenda that impacts people here, it impacts people around the world, and I think that we need to see our problems as linked."   Is Van Jones part of a "global struggle against a U.S.-led security apparatus"? Maybe, or maybe like the 9/11 Truth petition he signed, he simply didn't read the lyrics too closely before he read them into the microphone, produced, and then distributed the record below. It must be a great comfort to the uniformed personnel serving in the White House that they are serving alongside a man who, before he arrived in the White House six months ago, was accusing them of murdering babies, calling them terrorists, and fancied himself part of the global struggle against them and their comrades.


Van Jones: Highlights from Radical, Anti-War Album (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gRi1xoeLno&feature=player_embedded#normal)


now, this is only one example  of things this man has said, (and this record, he produced the entire thing)  he has said a LOT more  in the past two or three years, and the past FEW MONTHS.(he did call republicans a-holes, lol that was the most tame and probably the most accurate thing he said lol ,and i am a conservative)  all of his speeches were found on the internet, for all to see, no-one made it up, many are  irritated that conservatives or liberatarians are putting it forth. if you are sickened by the fact you might have to hear glenn becks voice or watch faux news  in order to see the videos of van jones, sorry about that, but other networks dont want to play the stuff, WHY?,   van jones pretty much condemns himself, if i were anyone in the obama administration i would be too  embarrassed to admit it too, strangely, they are not they supported him right up to friday. as to why the the other networks or cable did not report on it, why dont you ask them? most mainstream media are focusing on the fact he called republicans a-holes, which is the most silliest thing to be concerned about. who cares. this mans ideology is far more concerning.

so i ask you. after you  watch all of  MR VAN JONES OWN WORDS, all his speeches, (you can do a google search, fox news and glenn beck have them cataloged if you really want to see them in one place, they are on you tube too)  his own speeches in his own venues, from recent times, regardless who delivered them to you.  what do you think of mr van jones holding such a high office in our govt, and what the heck does his social justice ideology have to do with green jobs? and do you think president obama  should have  accountability for his choices. or do we pretend it is all cool.

i offer that then you might understand how the citizenry could suspect persons in the department of education in this administration (setting up lesson plans after the president's, speech, and they did do that,then pull them)   may have similar outlooks. or ideologies.. 
i am not saying they for sure do, but this administration has shown that they tolerate and espouse it (and people that do, aka van jones...) and dont insult my intelligence and say they did not know about van jones and his ideology, i dont buy  it anymore.   






Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 06, 2009, 12:03:10 PM
The internet is a 2 sided sword ( Facetiously thanking The GORE ). How many time do we warn out kids not to post things on the net that they might be sorry for later???? You are right.... in this day and age..... the Bam Bam Admin should learn how to "search" the Web instead of just use it. vetting is something this admin has not bothered with and see what is happening????
 
I remember Bam Bam...the candidate, pressing that you have to judge the man by those he has around him. Well we are certainly "judging" by his prescribed standards. It is a shame that the real meaning of " hope and change" in this admin is... "hurry.... change the czars and hope no one cares or notices!!!!" Van Jones is only one of many.... some, Bam Bam still embraces and in the end he will stink like they do.  If you "sleep" with skunks... don't cry when people notice that you too have an offensive "odor". 2010 and 2012 CANNOT come fast enough for me.  :-[
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 06, 2009, 12:28:37 PM
Every administration as far back as I can remember had this kind of activity, though admittedly Jones engaged his tongue before his brain intervened, if at all.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs thanked Jones for his service Sunday on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos." "What Van Jones decided was that the agenda of this president was bigger than any one individual," he said.

"So the president doesn't endorse, in any way, the things that Van Jones said before, the things he did?" Stephanopoulos asked.

"He doesn't, but he thanks him for his service," Gibbs said.

I suspect that Obama is downright out-andout pissed. The usual send off is accompanied by some glad-handed  the president. It didn't occur this time. I love and hate this crap because every new president winds up showing the world that they could have done a little (or lot) better in their appointments.

I wonder if this is some sort of secret presidential tradition, like the who can bring the biggest dorky date to a party?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 06, 2009, 01:13:55 PM
Let me repeat..... In this day of DIGITAL... you cannot be an ass one day and expect people to think you are a saint the next. It is TOOOOOO easy do "dig up the dirt" today. And no one is there to hide it. "Thinking back...what if a secret service officer had a camera cellphone while letting Marilyn in or out the back door of the White House in the early 60s.....????? I assure you...the media would have been paying BIG DOLLARS for those pictures or Movies. So much for Camelot. Today, even the most unwashed is privy to this information and sometimes in just seconds of a YOU TUBE posting..... Shame on Bam Bam and his acolytes.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 06, 2009, 01:21:37 PM
TMZ probably has a pretty big budget. I think most people here are aware of the pitfalls of the internet and other digital exposure, though not to N'th degree. I find it odd Obama would appoint someone that "media inept" to a public position though.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 07, 2009, 12:36:09 AM
do you think the citizens take their cues from  the media and are infulenced on how to feel or the media just report what the mood ot the people happens to be.


do you think the dynamic is the same for a fox viewer as a cnn  nbc or a msnbc viewer? or any other cable or mainstream source of news.



BH , yeah , I think the media (some more than others) shapes the news to influence beliefs toward a specific view.
As far as the dynamic, I also believe that FOX goes beyond the other networks in inflametory statements that when checked thru Fact Chek or snopes prove to be incorrect or way out of context or innacurate. Many of those same statements end up here on the forum, so in those cases the posters either believe them or want to.
Here's the issue I have with that:
FOX is a foreign controlled company, that is attempting to influence the American political landscape.
In many statements, the truth, or accuracy is not always relevant, as evident by a large number of Fact Check/Snopes hits on FOX statements.
Scott McClellan, the onetime Bush press secretary, remarked that "the truth is no longer relevant"(  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_McClellan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_McClellan) ) in describing todays politics. So is that view also permissable in the news?
Do we sacrifice or just ignore our moral compass "Thou shalt no bear false witness", as long as the exaggeration, falsehood , dishonest statement furthers our political interests/beliefs, and damages those we disagree with, or dont like? Afterall that would still leave us with 9 perfectly good commandments!


 
     


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 07, 2009, 07:21:24 AM
They're all guilty of spinning the news to get market share. Fox incorporated Delaware in 2004 after taking flack from the FCC. News Corp owns a ton of stuff here and abroad.

The company I work for is a constant battle with News Corp (among many others) about a number of things.  Look at the board of directors for a lot of media companies and you'll start seeing the political ties. I worked for Gannett in the 1980. Rosalyn Carter was on the board of directors at the time. What do suppose the edict handed down to all the little papers around the country about who they were supporting in the presidential election was? The editors didn't have much of a choice.

The political sphere is huge and very much all encompassing. In today's world though it's not just us, it's the world.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 07, 2009, 10:19:36 AM
what i find interesting is that all media outlets are biased, (so i sift them all,) as are all people. our wisdom lies in knowing our biases and guiding facts to our convictions if we find them to be true. there we run into a snag.. i cant answer your questions and you cant answer mine. i do think we can circumvent the media to some extent, or use it to our advantage to get information to help us make decisions , compile it from many sources and analyze it ourselves.

some  have "team" mentalities.  . some hate a team and want to be loners by default, unfortunately none of that really has any bearing on the truth of matters,  it sometimes clouds things.  not only has our journalistic crowd abandoned responsibility the political discourse has become  nonsense.

you brought up moral matters... my friend sent me this, in our age of postmodern political relativism i thought it was ironic but funny as heck...  ( i study with a platonist- conservative so as to keep my biases at bay)


Kant Attack Ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7M-cmNdiFuI#normal)



reason for edit...i had to add parenthesis to make a sentence make sense  :D ..


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 07, 2009, 02:06:01 PM
Prepared Remarks of President Barack Obama
 Back to School Event
Arlington, Virginia
 September 8, 2009
 
The President: Hello everyone – how’s everybody doing today? I’m here with students at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. And we’ve got students tuning in from all across America, kindergarten through twelfth grade. I’m glad you all could join us today.  I know that for many of you, today is the first day of school. And for those of you in kindergarten, or starting middle or high school, it’s your first day in a new school, so it’s understandable if you’re a little nervous. I imagine there are some seniors out there who are feeling pretty good right now, with just one more year to go. And no matter what grade you’re in, some of you are probably wishing it were still summer, and you could’ve stayed in bed just a little longer this morning. I know that feeling. When I was young, my family lived in Indonesia for a few years, and my mother didn’t have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday – at 4:30 in the morning.    Now I wasn’t too happy about getting up that early. A lot of times, I’d fall asleep right there at the kitchen table. But whenever I’d complain, my mother would just give me one of those looks and say, "This is no picnic for me either, buster." So I know some of you are still adjusting to being back at school. But I’m here today because I have something important to discuss with you. I’m here because I want to talk with you about your education and what’s expected of all of you in this new school year.  Now I’ve given a lot of speeches about education. And I’ve talked a lot about responsibility. I’ve talked about your teachers’ responsibility for inspiring you, and pushing you to learn.  I’ve talked about your parents’ responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don’t spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox.  I’ve talked a lot about your government’s responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren’t working where students aren’t getting the opportunities they deserve.  But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.  And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.  Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.  Maybe you could be a good writer – maybe even good enough to write a book or articles in a newspaper – but you might not know it until you write a paper for your English class. Maybe you could be an innovator or an inventor – maybe even good enough to come up with the next iPhone or a new medicine or vaccine – but you might not know it until you do a project for your science class. Maybe you could be a mayor or a Senator or a Supreme Court Justice, but you might not know that until you join student government or the debate team. And no matter what you want to do with your life – I guarantee that you’ll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You’re going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can’t drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You’ve got to work for it and train for it and learn for it. And this isn’t just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you’re learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future.  You’ll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You’ll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You’ll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.  We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don’t do that – if you quit on school – you’re not just quitting on yourself, you’re quitting on your country.  Now I know it’s not always easy to do well in school. I know a lot of you have challenges in your lives right now that can make it hard to focus on your schoolwork. I get it. I know what that’s like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn’t always able to give us things the other kids had. There were times when I missed having a father in my life. There were times when I was lonely and felt like I didn’t fit in.  So I wasn’t always as focused as I should have been. I did some things I’m not proud of, and got in more trouble than I should have. And my life could have easily taken a turn for the worse.  But I was fortunate. I got a lot of second chances and had the opportunity to go to college, and law school, and follow my dreams. My wife, our First Lady Michelle Obama, has a similar story. Neither of her parents had gone to college, and they didn’t have much. But they worked hard, and she worked hard, so that she could go to the best schools in this country. Some of you might not have those advantages. Maybe you don’t have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there’s not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don’t feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren’t right.  But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life – what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you’ve got going on at home – that’s no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That’s no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That’s no excuse for not trying.  Where you are right now doesn’t have to determine where you’ll end up. No one’s written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.  That’s what young people like you are doing every day, all across America.  Young people like Jazmin Perez, from Roma, Texas. Jazmin didn’t speak English when she first started school. Hardly anyone in her hometown went to college, and neither of her parents had gone either. But she worked hard, earned good grades, got a scholarship to Brown University, and is now in graduate school, studying public health, on her way to being Dr. Jazmin Perez. I’m thinking about Andoni Schultz, from Los Altos, California, who’s fought brain cancer since he was three. He’s endured all sorts of treatments and surgeries, one of which affected his memory, so it took him much longer – hundreds of extra hours – to do his schoolwork. But he never fell behind, and he’s headed to college this fall.  And then there’s Shantell Steve, from my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Even when bouncing from foster home to foster home in the toughest neighborhoods, she managed to get a job at a local health center; start a program to keep young people out of gangs; and she’s on track to graduate high school with honors and go on to college. Jazmin, Andoni and Shantell aren’t any different from any of you. They faced challenges in their lives just like you do. But they refused to give up. They chose to take responsibility for their education and set goals for themselves. And I expect all of you to do the same.  That’s why today, I’m calling on each of you to set your own goals for your education – and to do everything you can to meet them. Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book. Maybe you’ll decide to get involved in an extracurricular activity, or volunteer in your community. Maybe you’ll decide to stand up for kids who are being teased or bullied because of who they are or how they look, because you believe, like I do, that all kids deserve a safe environment to study and learn. Maybe you’ll decide to take better care of yourself so you can be more ready to learn. And along those lines, I hope you’ll all wash your hands a lot, and stay home from school when you don’t feel well, so we can keep people from getting the flu this fall and winter. Whatever you resolve to do, I want you to commit to it. I want you to really work at it.  I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work -- that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you’re not going to be any of those things.  But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won’t love every subject you study. You won’t click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try. That’s OK.  Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who’ve had the most failures. JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, "I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."  These people succeeded because they understand that you can’t let your failures define you – you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn’t mean you’re a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn’t mean you’re stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.  No one’s born being good at things, you become good at things through hard work. You’re not a varsity athlete the first time you play a new sport. You don’t hit every note the first time you sing a song. You’ve got to practice. It’s the same with your schoolwork. You might have to do a math problem a few times before you get it right, or read something a few times before you understand it, or do a few drafts of a paper before it’s good enough to hand in.  Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don’t know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust – a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor – and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.  And even when you’re struggling, even when you’re discouraged, and you feel like other people have given up on you – don’t ever give up on yourself. Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country. The story of America isn’t about people who quit when things got tough. It’s about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best.  It’s the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other. So today, I want to ask you, what’s your contribution going to be? What problems are you going to solve? What discoveries will you make? What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?   Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions. I’m working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn. But you’ve got to do your part too. So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you. So don’t let us down – don’t let your family or your country or yourself down. Make us all proud. I know you can do it. Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.   


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 07, 2009, 05:07:32 PM
that is an appropriate speech, motivational and in no way worthy of the rabid attacks it has received.

that being said...

there were lesson plans originally involved with this that raised red flags with people, they were promptly removed.   respected persons from conservative and liberal sources i have seen (in several respected news venues) say it was good they were removed as the lesson plans were political in nature. (that was the rub i surmise)  they were initiated by bureaucrats at the dept of education as far i can tell.  the question is should it have upset people??  here is the rub... president obama has many other folks in his administration  like mr van jones i brought up earlier in this thread that have similar ideology.  when you employ or are surrounded by people with those ideologies, (for years and years) after  awhile you can no longer put people off with mere benign fronts.  when there are  videos of  many different people in an administration (and there are)that have radical views, i imagine parents got nervous when they heard about a speech from the president accompanied by those politicized lesson plans.    to dismiss their concerns as baseless by just looking at the presidents "near perfect" speech is not taking into account the entire argument.

to criticize the "speech only" would make someone look like a fool, we would not want to make someone look like a fool by misrepresenting their argument. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 07, 2009, 09:35:09 PM
Take a look at the ideology of the Chicago Annenberg Project (CAC) that William Ayers co-founded and who had Barack Obama as a board member . . .

From the Wall Street Journal:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html?mod=rss_opinion_main (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html?mod=rss_opinion_main)

A quote from the article:

"The CAC's agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers's educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism."

That'd be a soundbyte for emails there - - - but, like I said, read the rest of the article.
 
Also - here's a synopsis of an evaluation of said project in 2003.
 
"An August 2003 final technical report of the Chicago Annenberg Research Project by the Consortium on Chicago School Research said that while "student achievement improved across Annenberg Challenge schools as it did across the Chicago Public School system as a whole, results suggest that among the schools it supported, the Challenge had little impact on school improvement and student outcomes, with no statistically significant differences between Annenberg and non-Annenberg schools in rates of achievement gain, classroom behavior, student self-efficacy, and social competence."
 
(Source: http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/downloads/p62II.pdf (http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/downloads/p62II.pdf) )
 
So - what was the point of the CAC again?
 
I honestly don't think the American public really knows anything substantive about the fellow they elected President . . . nor do they know the people who helped formulate his political ideas . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 07, 2009, 09:59:25 PM
I honestly don't think the American public really knows anything substantive about the fellow they elected President . . . nor do they know the people who helped formulate his political ideas . . . .

He won. Handily.

Get over it already. Get on with your life.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 07, 2009, 10:20:21 PM
Meh.

bh's article on ideology kinda explains the deal about gettin' on with my life. Fact is - I get on with my life every day . . . and did when Dumbyah was in office too. (I don't care for either major party - I'm "anti" them.) My personal "ideology" is where the rubber hits the road for me. the view from the rarified air of Washington does have its trickle down though. I'm just interested in what's gonna be tricklin' -

Yeah - he won . . . but now he's lookin' at approval ratings that aren't all that great (from Rasmussen: "Overall, 48% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove.") and folks are starting to question a lot of the folks he has around him, and some of the thoughts behind the decisions he makes . . . so - when stuff comes out about things he's been involved with or decisions he's making now that could have significant impact on the structure of government - it's OK - cuz he won?

I mean - Iraq was justified - cuz Bush won? (Didn't vote for him either. I think dunderhead frat boys with privileged Daddies that look Ok in snappy suits but that have little going on in the headspace don't make for great leaders in the long run either . . . and for the record, going to the Sandbox was not a very good move at all - IMO.)

Nah . . .

It's Monday - no pro football yet. Don't care for the 'Canes or the 'Noles . . . entertaining myself by digging.

Cuz I'm allowed to!

Timothy Leary had some cool ideas on me thinking for myself.


:-)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 07, 2009, 10:34:34 PM
BTW - that is a nice speech and totally appropriate.

Thanks for putting that up Kimmi!



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 08, 2009, 12:37:03 AM
BH, I likes the Kant video. I tried to read Kant and Neichze a long time ago. Could do about 2 paragraphs of either before I needed to score heroin or something, Way beyond me. I dont think I know anyone who considers them a moral compass. Most of the people I know are Golden rule,10 commandments types. Based on those I could answer your question I think.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 08, 2009, 09:32:57 AM
You are welcome.  I should have made sure the paragraphs were separated.  Sorry if it is hard to read.  I'll be watching today.  I may even go into work and see how many kids are in the media center not watching.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 08, 2009, 03:18:29 PM
Maybe a bit of History....
 
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/09/03/flashback-1991-gephardt-called-bushs-speech-students-paid-political-a (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/09/03/flashback-1991-gephardt-called-bushs-speech-students-paid-political-a)
 
 
 
18 years sometimes has a way of making people forget.... This is an ongoing P Fght... nothing more... nothing less and we act like this is NEW NEWS.... some of us should be ashamed.
 
While he waves his "right hand" ...what do you think the "left hand" is doing while we are taking our eyes off the real ball????? A good magician keeps fools busy at nothing.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 08, 2009, 10:41:36 PM
I worked for Gannett in the 1980. Rosalyn Carter was on the board of directors at the time. What do suppose the edict handed down to all the little papers around the country about who they were supporting in the presidential election was? The editors didn't have much of a choice.
Mrs. Carter didn't get on the GCI board until the mid-80s, by which time jimmy's only ambition was to get the roof on the latest Habitat home before dark.

Hearst may have done so decades ago, but few if any modern media chains order their managers to endorse any candidate; certainly not gannett, one of the better managed chains. I believe USA Today goes out of its way not to endorse anyone. (However, i understand the family-owned Ogden chain out of w. va., owners of the warren trib and some nearby ohio papers, DOES push conservative candidates on its papers)

If you want to promote conspiracies and interlocking alliances, you might as well point out that tom brokaw's wife, meredith, a children's-book publisher, is or was on the gannett board, too. I'm sure she ran home after board meetings to tell him which stories to cover.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 09, 2009, 07:05:12 AM
I stand corrected. Rosalyn Carter officially became a member of the board of directors in 1983 (http://www.gannett.com/news/pressrelease/1997/pr022897.htm) and served as an advisor to the board

However I distinctly remember talking with the editor who told me that the corporate told all the papers that they were to promote Carters reelection in in the editorial section. There's a tie to politics there somewhere, but that being said I can't tell you what the smoking gun is.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 09, 2009, 09:18:07 AM
Is this political?
 
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/53712 (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/53712)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 09, 2009, 10:07:50 AM
Is this political?
No, not unless he's brainwashing them to go out and campaign for him.

And is the following quote disturbing or what?

Quote
And my question is, currently 36 countries have universal health coverage, including Iraq and Afghanistan, which have it paid for by the United States.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 09, 2009, 12:28:57 PM
Anyone else agree with Spicoli????
 
A politician PITCHING???? Hmmmmmm
 
 
"President Barack Obama made a pitch for health care reform in a discussion with 40 freshmen at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Va."

Is this political?
No, not unless he's brainwashing them to go out and campaign for him.

And is the following quote disturbing or what?

Quote
And my question is, currently 36 countries have universal health coverage, including Iraq and Afghanistan, which have it paid for by the United States.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 09, 2009, 01:20:20 PM
What kind of political pull do you think 40 fourteen year olds have?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 09, 2009, 01:39:24 PM
not much, but how about the millions that will be voting in a few years?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 09, 2009, 03:40:35 PM
Afghanistan has universal healthcare coverage? Anybody look at Afghanistan's universal healthcare coverage?

I don't wanna denigrate a 14 year old - but - well -the question was kinda silly . . . and it's not a question neither - it's kind of a mis-statement.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 09, 2009, 03:45:55 PM
http://finance.senate.gov/Roundtable/complete%20text%20of%20financing%20policy%20options.pdf (http://finance.senate.gov/Roundtable/complete%20text%20of%20financing%20policy%20options.pdf)

THIS is the most recent update to the Healthcare Bill (well - the policy options that would be incuded in it.) It's the Max Baucus plan. You can take the President's word for it - or read it yourself. I prefer the latter.

It's not that great.

Especially in the "revenue" production parts . . .
 
Cripes - you want an idea of how a government mind works - look at pages 33 - 39.
 
And these are the folks we want "managing" our healthcare?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 09, 2009, 04:30:41 PM
What kind of political pull do you think 40 fourteen year olds have?
Som of those 14 y.o.'s could very well be voting during the next presidential election.  Interesting age group to target. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 09, 2009, 06:32:02 PM
Yes it's a massive conspiracy!  Obama knows that 14 year olds are very chatty.  He figured if he could get just 40 of them on his side that they would tell their friends and then they would tell their friends and so on and so on..., virtually guaranteeing him reelection.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 09, 2009, 07:08:45 PM
WASHINGTON — Fresh from a two-day weekend visit to Iraq, the Bush administration's top health-care official defended the $950 million that will be spent to help Iraq establish universal health care.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001870042_iraqdig03.html (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001870042_iraqdig03.html)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 09, 2009, 07:46:16 PM
Yes it's a massive conspiracy!  Obama knows that 14 year olds are very chatty.  He figured if he could get just 40 of them on his side that they would tell their friends and then they would tell their friends and so on and so on..., virtually guaranteeing him reelection.
I was only saying it certainly could be an interesting target audience on a large scale.  I don't think that was what was happening yesterday in a room with 40 kids.   I have a 15 y.o. son who will be voting in the next election....we don't think of them as voters now......BUT - it will be here before we know it!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 10, 2009, 07:27:39 AM
You miss the point if you are looking at the numbers of students he talked to.....( remember the analogy... "while you look at his left hand, you are ignoring his right". It is the fact that politicking in a public school (any tax funded building) is not exactly "kosher".
 
And good point on the "14-15" year olds. Voting age is NOT 21 anymore. If youth are as interested in politics as many claim.... an "informed" 14-15 year old can be potent in 3-4 years. Right now, us Gray Hairs seem to be the participants of number and growing. "Rock On Boomers!!!!!!"
 
Now... if numbers are relative to you .... remember this...
 
"Kill one man and you are a murderer. Kill millions and you are a conqueror. Kill everyone and you are a God."


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 10, 2009, 10:22:06 AM
puff mentioned the golden rule... i agree. another way to see it is expressed as follows... (this ought to be a warning to us as individuals as well as a comfort to us regarding the practices that defile truth and decency.)

Retribution often means that we eventually do to ourselves what we have done unto others.
     
    Eric Hoffer (secular philosopher, recipient of the presidential medal of freedom 1983)


things will work out the way they are supposed to. in the end.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 10, 2009, 07:39:41 PM
The literature passed out at that High school turned out to be from a pro-life group.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 11, 2009, 01:45:12 AM
The literature passed out at that High school turned out to be from a pro-life group.
Oh, so it WAS from someone who pals around with radical terrorists.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 11, 2009, 06:59:02 AM
Quote
Oh, so it WAS from someone who pals around with radical terrorists.

Good one!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 11, 2009, 07:49:45 AM
Quote
Oh, so it WAS from someone who pals around with radical terrorists.
Good one!

I had to re-read that one a couple of times before I figured it out...reaching for coffee...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 11, 2009, 09:33:39 AM
I was listening to WKBN and a PARENT was saying that their child got..... P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L ... crap that had Obama's name on it. This came from a call in on one of the morning shows. Sorry... didn't mention anything about pro-life... maybe both were busy.
 
 
The literature passed out at that High school turned out to be from a pro-life group.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 11, 2009, 08:33:59 PM
I found this to be interesting....seems Beck dropped to second place...
 
 
CABLE NEWS RACE
THURSDAY NITE, SEPT 10

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,609,000
FOXNEWS BECK 3,340,000
FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,986,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 2,522,000
FOXNEWS BAIER 2,362,000
FOXNEWS SHEP 2,040,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 1,573,000
MSNBC MADDOW 1,164,000
CNN KING 965,000
MSNBC HARDBALL 882,000
MSNBC SCHULTZ 734,000
CNN COOPER 691,000


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 12, 2009, 08:32:39 AM
I watch none of the cable news shows anymore.
 
My 5 yr old daughter insists on 'Dirty Jobs' and professional rodeo if we're not watching a Disney movie... :thumbsup:
 
There are a lot of people like me though, the news just sucks, never liked to watch it anyway.
 
Beck steps over the line all the time, and it is getting close to yelling fire in a theater.  :rant:
 
Exodus 22:28 (http://biblestudy.crosswalk.com/mybst/default.aspx?type=bible&reference=ex%2022:28&translation=niv)
Matthew 22:21 (http://biblestudy.crosswalk.com/mybst/default.aspx?type=bible&reference=mt%2022:21&translation=niv)
 
My kids pray for and respect the president to make the right decisions, they have done this since 2006.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 12, 2009, 08:40:38 AM
I don't watch the "news" shows either.  I'll read things on various news websites and then make my decisions from there.  Listening to these so called news reporters is like listening to 8 year olds telling on each other - you listen to half and believe 1/4. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 12, 2009, 09:33:14 AM
Like listening to 8 year olds tell on each other.....nice analogy. :)
I watch alot of CNN myself.  Just always have.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 12, 2009, 10:01:02 AM
I watch Cable news as well as read at least 4 newspapers from national.... I like FOX because they seem to FIND and VERIFY a lot more than the others. I know I am not alone..... numbers.... Even the NATIONAL ENQUIRE has shown more integrity and ability than the Base Papers.
 
Loved all the ACORN coverage all but FOX did.... to include printed media. When Grand Daughters are here... it is cartoons and kids shows...when they are not.... I read, surf, listen and watch as much news as I can during the day. Night is for NCIS and SCI.
 
I am 95% Conservative...5% bleeding heart... love kids and though I don't always show it.... young and small animals... Would you trust me with them????
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 12, 2009, 12:40:02 PM
did you realize yesterday the US census bureau completely cut ties with ACORN. they put out a letter, all official and all.  do you know why they cut ties? you would be hard pressed to hear it from most news sources. i would classify that as important news as ACORN is on tap to access billions of taxpayer dollars from the stimulus bill. ACORN was to count the folks in the urban US and be partners with census bureau to do so.  i wonder why some "news sources" would  be reluctant to tell the citizens that development.

do you think me telling you this is akin to spreading conspiracies about the media or do you wonder why the media is not abiding by the principles of journalistic integrity? do we not have minds to sift and sort? is this not part of what we must do daily to find some semblance of what is going on?

 what form of condescension of the messenger can possibly erase culpability of corruption or the lack of responsibility shown by enablers (messengers that protect their own special interests) ??




Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 12, 2009, 12:42:16 PM
What bh said.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 12, 2009, 02:02:57 PM
I don't watch the "news" shows either.  ... Listening to these so called news reporters is like listening to 8 year olds telling on each other ...

See, that's where part of the problem comes from. Brian Williams and Charlie Gibson are news reporters. So's the guy who covers city council for you local newspaper or TV station.

But most of these people on cable news channels -- the o'reillys, becks, scarboroughs of the  world -- aren't news reporters. They're commentators who start with the news as a topic and then take off into opinionated tangents.

The problem is that the public is having a harder and harder time making the distinction. This further clouds the public discourse when the undiscerning average person's head is filled with "facts" from these biased sources.

it all gets back to school's responsibility to teach not just knowledge but also the lifetime skill of being able to think for yourself and tell fact from fiction.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 12, 2009, 08:51:21 PM
Hmmmm news reporters..... Would you call Walter Cronkite a reporter or Commentator???? What is/was he? Methinks the line is very thin between and betwixed the two. Seems they can walk both sides of that line...don't you?
 
I remember this....
 
 
WALTER CRONKITE

Hailed as "the most trusted man in America" during his 18 years as anchor of the "CBS Evening News," Walter Cronkite first gained national recognition for his reporting from the battlefields of World War II. As a United Press correspondent, Cronkite covered the landings in North Africa and Sicily, the Allied invasion of Normandy and the subsequent battles across France and Germany. He was also a member of the "Writing 69th," a group of intrepid reporters that accompanied Allied bombers on missions over Germany. In 1968, while anchor of the "CBS Evening News," Cronkite journeyed to Vietnam to report on the aftermath of the Tet offensive. In a dramatic departure from the traditions of "objective" journalism, Cronkite concluded his reports with a personal commentary in which he voiced his strong belief that the war would end in stalemate. Cronkite's editorial would later be regarded as a critical indice of public opinion of the Vietnam War.
 
 
I don't watch the "news" shows either.  ... Listening to these so called news reporters is like listening to 8 year olds telling on each other ...

See, that's where part of the problem comes from. Brian Williams and Charlie Gibson are news reporters. So's the guy who covers city council for you local newspaper or TV station.

But most of these people on cable news channels -- the o'reillys, becks, scarboroughs of the  world -- aren't news reporters. They're commentators who start with the news as a topic and then take off into opinionated tangents.

The problem is that the public is having a harder and harder time making the distinction. This further clouds the public discourse when the undiscerning average person's head is filled with "facts" from these biased sources.

it all gets back to school's responsibility to teach not just knowledge but also the lifetime skill of being able to think for yourself and tell fact from fiction.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Kimmi on September 12, 2009, 10:13:13 PM
it all gets back to school's responsibility to teach not just knowledge but also the lifetime skill of being able to think for yourself and tell fact from fiction.                                                

Thanks.  I'll add that to my ever growing curriculum!  ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 12, 2009, 10:57:36 PM
Hey bh - you still got that article on "bias?"


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 13, 2009, 01:46:45 AM
Hmmmm news reporters..... Would you call Walter Cronkite a reporter or Commentator?

A news reporter who occasionally would deliver commentaries within a clearly-identified and defined segment of his broadcasts.

A good definition of what is NOT news: Any broadcast with two or more hosts or guests talking or shouting over one another at the same time.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 13, 2009, 09:06:22 AM
  The Definition of Bias

[1] If you think you understand the definition of bias, you should ask yourself the following question: Am I biased? If you answered no, like the vast majority of people are inclined to, this section was written specifically for you. If, on the other hand, you answered yes, there is nothing to be gleaned from this essay that you don't already know, and you should proceed to the Table of Contents.

[2] Bias is perhaps the most widely misunderstood word in the English language. At the root of the misunderstanding is the naive notion that there is such a thing as impartiality or objectivity. In the history of humankind, there has never lived a truly impartial soul, nor will such a person ever exist. To be biased is to be human.

[3] What is the definition of bias? Bias is simply each person's unique predisposition of how to see the world. It is our own prejudice in thinking when we are confronted with new events.

[4] To entirely escape these predispositions is impossible. We are born inherently biased. Much of our psychology is governed by the powerful, primal urges of the subconscious mind, such as the libido or the survival instinct. Indeed, the mere desire to continue breathing is itself a bias; there may, after all, be someone else predisposed to killing us and we certainly do not hesitate to identify that person's bias.

[5] But our biases extend far beyond our most basic programming such as the will to live or the desire for sex. Our entire brain is built upon biases, derived from our experiences, and these experiences physically imprint themselves upon who we are by forming neural connections in the brain called synapses. Our entire way to think is a kind of biological bias, and our predispositions are a large part of who we are.

[6] Put bluntly, the idea that anyone is beyond bias is at best intellectually fraudulent and at worst philosophically dangerous.


The Media's Definition of Bias

[7] When we hear the word bias in the media, it is charged with negative emotion. The mere pronunciation of the word by journalists is telling, for it is a word not so much spoken as seethed or spat. Opinions, ideas, and even people are routinely dismissed out of hand in the media as biased, and the charge is so powerful as to effectively stifle any and all intellectual debate.

[8] At the root of such behavior is a particularly crude definition of bias, that can only be described, in Nietzsche's words, as "human, all too human." Indeed, the fundamental faith of the journalist is the faith in opposite values.1 The media's crude definition of bias is actually a perverted form ethics, which defines only the opinions one disagrees with as biased (and by extension evil, though that word is never used), whereas one's own differing opinions are necessarily the opposite, which is to say, unbiased and good.

[9] This sleight of hand is perhaps the greatest magic trick ever performed, for the intellectual Houdinis of modern journalism (on both the right and left) have managed to make their own biases disappear while distracting their audience with the biases of others. Their definition of bias by necessity includes the most egregious, extreme, and obviously unjust forms of bias, such as racism, sexism, and homophobia, but also more dangerously includes the ideology and partisanship from whichever side of the political aisle happens to oppose them.

[10] Fox News' slogan "fair and balanced", for example, has been widely mocked by the other news networks who dismiss Fox's bias as right wing, which of course it is. This criticism is naturally aimed at promoting their own left-leaning networks over that of Fox. But what is troubling, and typical of the media, is the strategy employed here. Their criticism is not, "Fox's bias does not reflect the beliefs of most Americans, but our bias does." Rather, their criticism is "Fox's bias does not reflect the beliefs of most Americans, so watch our networks instead which aren't biased at all."

[11] This claim of being beyond all prejudice, which is completely contrary to the very definition of bias, is common to all news networks and newspapers. Fox itself makes no attempt to be honest about its bias, and was even willing to sue when its "fair and balanced" slogan was satirized. Media enterprises to the left of Fox are equally vociferous in proclaiming their own neutrality, like CNN which declares itself "the most trusted name in news."

[12] But why is the notion of bias such anathema to the media? Why are they so intent on denying their biases? Why don't they employ the principle of charity?

[13] The definition of bias presented here is a natural one based upon the most rudimentary common sense. And yet, everything inside the heart of the journalist viciously resists any admission of personal bias, however natural. To understand why, one must first understand the ethical view of the world peculiar to those in the media.

[14] For journalists, the entire history of ethical thought can be condensed into a single idea from the Gospels: "Judge not, that ye be not judged."2 Every other ethical precept is dismissed as relative and irrelevant. Journalists devote an enormous amount of their time and energy to the pursuit of just two themes, which recur again and again in their reporting: the biases of the newsmakers they follow and those newsmakers' hypocrisies. For journalists, the act of judging and especially of pre-judging is the sole sin. Their definition of bias is a definition of evil.

[15] Of course, the words good and evil are never used, for in the journalist's mind evil is synonymous with bias, whereas good is a sort of detached neutrality. There are, astonishingly, no real concepts of good and evil in journalistic ethics; there is merely bias and neutrality.

[16] This backward philosophy likely derives from the journalistic ideal, which for noble and obvious reasons, is neutrality in interpreting and reporting the news. And one should, of course, strive for ideals. But when one mistakes ideals for worldly truths, one's humanity is lost. As the poet William Blake put it, "Attempting to be more than Man we become less."3

[17] The journalistic definition of bias as the sole source of evil in the world is not merely absurd, but dangerous. The act of proclaiming oneself beyond bias is hubris tantamount to declaring oneself a god among men. It is, in essence, to flatly deny any fallibility and to elevate one's own opinions to the level of religious truth.

[18] The fallacy in all of this, is that bias is not necessarily evil. Jesus himself was biased against the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and it is the fool indeed who dismisses the Gospels out of hand as biased bunk. Nor, for that matter, when Christ spoke those famous words about judging was he endorsing a relativistic view of the world; on the contrary, what he was protesting was the smug superiority of those who camouflage their own sins through criticism of others, much the way journalists hide their biases by exposing the predispositions of others that contradict their own.

[19] Nor does bias necessarily make an opinion false. The journalistic myth that the truth is unbiased has done incalculable damage to the modern discourse and lowered the level of intellectual debate. Conservatives and liberals no longer argue matters on the merits of logic and the strength of arguments; rather, they construct sophisticated sophistries aimed at revealing their opponents' biases. The definition of bias, they believe, is simply to be wrong; to prove an enemy's bias is to prevail.

[20] But the origin of an opinion neither confirms nor denies its validity; the truth is not unbiased. Slavery was not a reprehensible sin because slave-owners were biased; it was a sin because the human soul is free and any attempt to imprison or injure it is a crime against God.

[21] Abraham Lincoln did not travel across Illinois to debate Stephen Douglas because his neutrality spurred him on; were he really so dispassionate and unbiased, he would not have had the motivation to continue breathing, let alone win the Civil War and free the slaves. Lincoln traveled across Illinois because he knew his own convictions and his own biases were right, and that when a man defends truth, he has both reason and God on his side.

[22] Today there is no need for debate on slavery or racism; because of people like Lincoln, we are able to dismiss racist opinions as evil of the very worst sort. But while there are indeed biases which merit no debate, such as racism or sexism, we forget that the reason these need no debate is because they have been debated. Western civilization rightly rejects such biases because other, superior biases have replaced them.

[23] Ultimately, the danger inherent in the current media discourse is that there will be no debate and our souls will be the poorer for it. Since the journalists and politicians of our age admit no bias, ideas are no longer considered on their merits but on their biases. Whereas Lincoln and Douglas dueled as virtuoso wordsmiths with facts as foils, the discourse of our age, which is almost exclusively limited to charges of bias, resembles a pair of chimpanzees flinging feces at one another.

[24] In short, ours is an age that denies the definition of bias. If we were wiser, we would not ask about others, "Is this person biased?" but rather, "Are this person's biases logically and morally justifiable?" Exposed to such criteria, the good biases inevitably triumph over the evil.

2006


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 13, 2009, 09:51:23 AM
Thank you very much bh! I'm copying and pasting that for future use. You rock!

I think this ought to be required reading for anyone accessing our modern media . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 13, 2009, 10:20:15 AM
Certainly sounds like YOUR definition.... not mine.... NEWSpapers are suppose to give you NEWS but if you read the Herald and some of the National NEWSpapers...they slant, one way or the other in presentation. Your choices are unlimited... NEWS.... COMMENTARY.... there is no definable line in my eyes..... and sometimes having more than 2 or 3 people there is a better way to see BOTH sides..or as many as there are, as opposed to a "captive audience" by one. There is nothing wrong with avid discourse in a democratic society. Those opposed to it, seem to be on the preceived weaker end of the argument.
 
So add in BIAS..... or even DISCRIMITION.... I AM. Not in all things but in things important to me.... I think my Grand Daughters are the MOST beautiful in the world but..... I am not so selfcentered to think EVERYONE does. I am one of those crotchety Ol' Men who when approached by a new mother with a baby and she is doling out the beauty of their child, think..... Hmmmm Head out of proportion to the body, and demanding... Ok.... beauty in the eyes of the beholder. I HATE LIVER!!! Maybe even go so far as to wonder why people are so enamored with their dogs that they kiss them and let them lick their face.... knowing full well that dog just licked it's privates or had the snout stuck up the rear of the neighbors dog. Biased???? I go to several sources of "News" and glean out what is common to most and take that as as close to news as I can get. I also look at what is being "reported" and the actions taken.... ie.... FOX and the ACORN crap. 2 offices.... 4 firings, more investigation and the media OTHER THAN FOX either didn't or barely touched it...HMMMMMM NEWS? COMMENTARY? Even the lowly National Enquire broke the Edwards "Schtupping" story before and in spite of the larger more popular media sources. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn (pun intended) once in a while. GO FIGURE.
 
We can argue these points all day but, to me, my system works for ME and many others of my ilk.
 
 
Hmmmm news reporters..... Would you call Walter Cronkite a reporter or Commentator?

A news reporter who occasionally would deliver commentaries within a clearly-identified and defined segment of his broadcasts.

A good definition of what is NOT news: Any broadcast with two or more hosts or guests talking or shouting over one another at the same time.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 13, 2009, 11:47:34 AM
... FOX and the ACORN crap. 2 offices.... 4 firings, more investigation and the media OTHER THAN FOX either didn't or barely touched it...[/quote

i believe CNN broke the acorn video story and the others played catch-up.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 13, 2009, 11:54:21 AM
FOX reported on that story I believe 16 times.... cnn may have broke it initially( Not sure of that) but there was NO followup and as for the other media, video and print... next to NADA. FOX ate everybodies lunch on this.
 
 
... FOX and the ACORN crap. 2 offices.... 4 firings, more investigation and the media OTHER THAN FOX either didn't or barely touched it...[/quote

i believe CNN broke the acorn video story and the others played catch-up.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 13, 2009, 12:01:08 PM
there clearly is a difference between bias and opinion. Opinion is a identified commentary, whereas bias is a subtle taint to what is supposed to be neutral.

my point was that there are news shows and there are opinion/commentary/entertainment shows, and the average person has trouble telling the two apart anymore.

Oddly, this seems to be mostly a cable-network problem. The broadcast networks seem to have pretty clear news shows (60 mins., nightly news) and  news analysis (Meet the Press, which rarely has anyone shouting let alone shouting at the same time other people). OK, you could argue that the morning entertainment shows (Today, GMA) are in the gray area.

Someone once said that the problem started when reporters started interviewing other reporters instead of interviewing primary news sources. It gets tiring to hear a two-sentence summary of a news event then "for more on this, now we turn to our expert, xxxxx", which leads to opinionated analysis from the same, old faces night after night.

on MSNBC, for instance, Pat Buchanan and John Dean originally did cameo appearances to address specific stories dealing with presidential politics or white house secrecy. Now Buchanan is just another talking head who opines about anything and everything.

Even the locals are into the interviewing-their-own syndrome. The other night a sports reporter for WFMJ was giving a straightforward presentation on what football games were happening that night. Then he turned the mic over to a sports writer for the vindicator, who proceeded to go through who he expected would win the key games.

Here were two peers in journalism, yet one suddenly morphed into an all-knowing expert before going back to his job covering the same games. It wasn't misrepresented as straight news, but it illustrates the secondary problem of inbreeding of expert sources.

Couple this with panels of the same people just rehashing news events back and forth putting their own spin on things, and this is why people can't tell what's real and what's opinion anymore.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 13, 2009, 12:03:22 PM
So clearly ... by your own words there is NO REAL NEWS reporting?..... We all put our own slant in what we do.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 13, 2009, 12:08:43 PM
We all put our own slant in what we do.

Yup. Especially if you're from the opposing side and get nominated to the supreme court.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 13, 2009, 01:46:18 PM
I think the only "news reporting" on Fox is their little one minute updates they do every half hour, lol!  The other 99.9% of the day is devoted to opinion!

Anybody ever notice how Fox is extremely obsessed with the Democrats-even during both this admin. and the last one?  For proof, all you have to do is take notice of how often they say the word "Democrats".  No matter when you tune in all you ever hear is,  "the Democrats  this..."  "the Democrats that...".  Their scrolls at the bottom of the screen are the same way.  In contrast, do the big three's evening news casts obsess over the Republicans?  I think not.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 13, 2009, 04:00:00 PM
OMG Paallleeeeeaaassseee!!!! And you haven't heard OP-ED, Olbermann and Maddow????? I would put the FOX crew up against any of them..... Even Major got the EMAIL scoop on Gibbs the Weasel. And..... if you happen on an interview with Obama....even HE commented on FOX/Beck being in the 24 hour NEWS-CYCLE . Someone forgot to tell the POTUS!!!!  :o 
 
Now ...again... understand... I watch, listen and read other Electronic and written media. I happen to like FOX.... Along with MILLIONS of others. If we are so few I wish they would all send me a dollar each  ;D ... Rant all you want about them but..... check the ratings, check out who watches them.... All the others can only WISH for those numbers. Someone has to be watching....  ;)  perhaps even........ you???  ;D
 
Republicans this and Republicans that and it is all BUSH'S fault WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!
 
 
 
 
I think the only "news reporting" on Fox is their little one minute updates they do every half hour, lol!  The other 99.9% of the day is devoted to opinion!

Anybody ever notice how Fox is extremely obsessed with the Democrats-even during both this admin. and the last one?  For proof, all you have to do is take notice of how often they say the word "Democrats".  No matter when you tune in all you ever hear is,  "the Democrats  this..."  "the Democrats that...".  Their scrolls at the bottom of the screen are the same way.  In contrast, do the big three's evening news casts obsess over the Republicans?  I think not.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 13, 2009, 04:23:30 PM
I was comparing Fox to the three major networks.  But even comparing Fox to MSNBC, there's no comparison.  MSNBC as a whole isn't as obsessed with the Republicans as Fox is with the Democrats,IMO.  Heck, even Fox's morning show is biased, but like I said that shouldn't be a surprise since practically the whole network is devoted to opinion shows, all of which are right wingnut.

It's all Obama's fault WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 13, 2009, 04:34:47 PM
Historically the news media has been a platform for those to wield their influence via the written, later spoken and now seen opinions. It's been that way for centuries.

The media's ship of truth is gonna list and it ain't never gonna sit straight neither.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 13, 2009, 06:18:28 PM
Buddy..... if ya ain't checked it out lately..... Liberal media is gettin' smaller and smaller and in some cases POOF....Gone. Air America is a fart in the forest....
 
Even Imus, who I saw as a left to moderate... is joining FOX. Say what you want, but FOX is eating a heck of a lot of lunches and enjoying the reaction of the Left.
 
And we may be listing, ( credit NP)  but we are still floating.... if you can't handle the trip Mr. S.  .... here... offering you a barf bag. ;)
 
 
I was comparing Fox to the three major networks.  But even comparing Fox to MSNBC, there's no comparison.  MSNBC as a whole isn't as obsessed with the Republicans as Fox is with the Democrats,IMO.  Heck, even Fox's morning show is biased, but like I said that shouldn't be a surprise since practically the whole network is devoted to opinion shows, all of which are right wingnut.

It's all Obama's fault WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 14, 2009, 02:16:48 AM
I happen to like FOX.... Along with MILLIONS of others


(http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1198517343p2/9810.jpg) (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/9810.Albert_Einstein)           "What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right."    
    Albert Einstein    


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 14, 2009, 07:17:11 AM
I don't know - when I read in some media places that the number of folks who went to Washington Saturday was in the "tens of thousands" vs. the numbers reported by Metro Police and the Parks Dept. (1.2M and 1.5M respectivelt) - I gotta say there's a disconnect somewhere.

The persons who control the flow of information control the public's perceptions.

What is right and what is beneficial to one side or the other are different things.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 14, 2009, 07:59:36 AM
Hate to tell you but.... you are quoting a man who started out flunking math in grade school, never learned to tie his own shoes and never was able to learn to drive a car.
 
He was good for some things but his quotes ain't what he was best at. Will Rogers is more my speed or maybe someone I can relate to. But go with the ones who think the same I guess.
 
 
I happen to like FOX.... Along with MILLIONS of others


([url]http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1198517343p2/9810.jpg[/url]) ([url]http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/9810.Albert_Einstein[/url])           "What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right."   
    Albert Einstein


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 14, 2009, 08:10:26 AM
I agree with you on that observation. I go to Washington DC several times a year. I use to go to Rolling Thunder over Memorial Day and I hear the follow up.... "750,000 motorcycles are in DC. People.... 750,000 motorcycles + blocked off main thoroughfares + half with one passenger and half with 2 people = NO WAY they can fit in the areas reported... Staged at the Pentagon on down through the Constitution Ave. areas. Maybe they were counting them as they traveled the Beltway too  :o ... I was there in 1984 when they dedicated the Statue of Three Men near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. Claims at that time were 350,000. I can assure you... there was NO room to move or travel in that mess. The streets were FULL in the Basin/Mall area.
 
Give the Devil his due.... I would say 10s of thousands for the rally.. LOL even British papers said 1-2 million but remember..... they use the METRIC system  ;D ... No matter what...... there was a heck of a lot of people in DC for that rally... no ifs ands or buts. "CAN YOU HEAR THEM NOW???"
 
I don't know - when I read in some media places that the number of folks who went to Washington Saturday was in the "tens of thousands" vs. the numbers reported by Metro Police and the Parks Dept. (1.2M and 1.5M respectivelt) - I gotta say there's a disconnect somewhere.

The persons who control the flow of information control the public's perceptions.

What is right and what is beneficial to one side or the other are different things.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 14, 2009, 11:39:11 AM
I don't know - when I read in some media places that the number of folks who went to Washington Saturday was in the "tens of thousands" vs. the numbers reported by Metro Police and the Parks Dept. (1.2M and 1.5M respectivelt) - I gotta say there's a disconnect somewhere.

The persons who control the flow of information control the public's perceptions.

What is right and what is beneficial to one side or the other are different things.

it is puzzling isn't it?

 we had the opportunity to go to DC this past weekend but had to pass. (as i had posted about a week ago mr bh was taken off another arrythmia drug. he was advised not to travel for 6-8 weeks.) we knew people that went and were quite impressed. it would have been an opportunity to witness a little history being made, regardless of the fact the media is downplaying it for the most part.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 14, 2009, 08:02:21 PM
well, how many of you saw this... it happened this early evening

Amendment Number:    S.Amdt. 2355  to H.R. 3288  (Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010)

Statement of Purpose:    Prohibiting use of funds to fund the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

see the govt website...


http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00275 (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00275)

hmmm 83-7 that is bi-partisan ha? wonder what ACORN did?? do you know? many dont. another crime here is that much of the media is likely covering for corruption and refuses to report on this. interesting isnt it? 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 14, 2009, 08:28:35 PM
Buddy..... if ya ain't checked it out lately..... Liberal media is gettin' smaller and smaller and in some cases POOF....Gone. Air America is a fart in the forest....
 
Even Imus, who I saw as a left to moderate... is joining FOX. Say what you want, but FOX is eating a heck of a lot of lunches and enjoying the reaction of the Left.
 
It's better to win elections than Nielsen ratings! :)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 14, 2009, 10:50:17 PM
Interesting, though, that of the mere 40 republicans in the senate, 7 of them didn't vote at all (7 of the 9 overall who didn't vote). And they included some names like mccain, coburn, graham, and hutichison.

Wouldn't ya think they'd all want to vote firmly against acorn, then grandstand about it? Maybe they're closet supporters...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 15, 2009, 07:41:35 AM
Are you kidding me???? The DEMS are still crying about Florida and Gore but ...having said that... Thinking of this "agument" on the "Right Wing-nutz" and this admin.... I can't wait until 2010-12. In some ways, methinks ratings and elections are kissin' cousins... We shall see.
 
 
 
 
Buddy..... if ya ain't checked it out lately..... Liberal media is gettin' smaller and smaller and in some cases POOF....Gone. Air America is a fart in the forest....
 
Even Imus, who I saw as a left to moderate... is joining FOX. Say what you want, but FOX is eating a heck of a lot of lunches and enjoying the reaction of the Left.
 
It's better to win elections than Nielsen ratings! :)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 15, 2009, 07:51:53 AM
hmm, i don't know  jayhawk,  mccain and graham were at a town hall event in S.C. at the citadel earlier in the day, i watched that event on tv, perhaps they were not even back yet.  anyhow that doesnt   detract from the landslide non partisan vote.

truthfully i cant answer for why an individual would vote or not vote. maybe they are closet supporters as you suggest, only they can answer, too bad the freaking media will not ask them, hu? maybe they will soon.

still,  not much discussion in the media  on the substance of the issue, the corruption of ACORN?  or is ACORN  -- to big to fail, or closer to,  to dear to fail...  this is getting interesting, indeed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on September 15, 2009, 08:53:49 PM
http://biggovernment.com/ (http://biggovernment.com/)



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 15, 2009, 09:33:01 PM
I can tell you this. NIelsen likes the republicans because the democrats infringe upon them by wanting to heavily regulate how they do business. The Media Rating Council hasn't gotten to far into the under the new administration, however they eventually will. I think PR and "image" rather than ratings get the votes. It's a sign of the times... form over function.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 16, 2009, 01:07:09 AM
When you mention Media Rating, I think of Howard Stern.
 
How valid is MR what with satellite radio, pay per view, cable, and the Internet?
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 16, 2009, 06:59:53 AM
Radio ratings are performed by Arbitron though NIelsen iswants to play in  that field as well. Nielsen monitors a lot things, including cable, the internet, pay-per-view, time shifted viewing, consumer spending and a wealth of other things.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 16, 2009, 07:50:13 AM
Did not know that.  I'm always being watched......


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 16, 2009, 07:58:31 AM
Not you, unless you are one of about 50,000 plusNielsen families. 

What the government watches I don't know.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 16, 2009, 08:42:58 AM
Well - looks like the race card has been played. (It was inevitable.) Personally - I don't care who the President "is" - I just care about how they're policies are going to effect my life . . . race is the least of the issues.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/is-it-because-hes-black/ (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/is-it-because-hes-black/)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 16, 2009, 12:03:17 PM
Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.



There is no provision for its proposal for the US Government to provide healthcare . . . or take over banks . . . or auto comapnies. Now - one could argue that the general welfare could include healthcare, but when you look at the general limits of power, it provids for regulation of services to promote better services and service provision.

It does not provide for the services themselves save for a few exceptions. (Which are clearly delineated above.)

We've come along way . . .

Question is - are we ready for or needing a new Constitution? Cuz - that's the bottom line - ain't it?

If no - there's lotsa superfluous BS that we can farm out to providers and shitcan the Federal Bureacracy for. If yes - well - there's gonna be a lot 'splainin' to do Lucy . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 16, 2009, 12:42:53 PM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/16/obama-wh-collects-web-users-data/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/16/obama-wh-collects-web-users-data/)

So - what they're saying is the White house is gathering data from facebook and keeping track of who makes what comments on their postings?

So what?

Anything I'd post on facebook regarding policies and bills I disagree with I'd say to any legislator or the President in person anyway. It ain't like they don't know already . . . probably have a little dossier going already from my old MSN blog that ranted against the Bush Administration on occasion . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 16, 2009, 03:46:47 PM
Your rantings are always an interesting read that can usually garnish a giggle from me.  So if they have a sense of humor, it's all good. :)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 16, 2009, 05:39:36 PM
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTAxODA3OGM4MGMxZDY5MzQzMjNlNjgxODhmNjA3MjI= (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTAxODA3OGM4MGMxZDY5MzQzMjNlNjgxODhmNjA3MjI=)

The End of Welfare Reform as We Know It.

Read the article . . .

I plan on letting Dahlkemper, Casey and Specter know what I think of their voting on the "Stimulus" package . . . think they even read it?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 16, 2009, 05:52:30 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/15/taking_liberties/entry5314040.shtml (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/15/taking_liberties/entry5314040.shtml)

The Treasury Department comes "out" on Cap and Trade.

Hmph! And it ain't Fox News!

Imagine that . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 16, 2009, 07:38:35 PM
So - what they're saying is the White house is gathering data from facebook and keeping track of who makes what comments on their postings?

Sounds no different than keeping constituent letters or faxes in a file folder after they are received.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on September 16, 2009, 09:11:44 PM
I don't follow this thread closely but I have been bugged by something.
 
 
(http://www.cagle.msnbc.com/news/YouLie/images/duffy.jpg)
 
 
 
I find it particularly funny that within days of each other, Joe Wilson called Obama a liar, and then Obama called Kanye West a jackass.
 
 
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01481/west_1481725c.jpg)     
 
 
Joe Wilson was chastised and called a racist for his "outburst", and made to apologise. Yes, maybe his etiquette was improper, but at least he was listening and not playing video games during the speech.   
 
 
(http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/5177/1125331-solitaire_500_super.jpg)   
 
 
Yet no one mentions the name-calling when it comes to Obama being the name-caller, instead they blame the news person for releasing the "off the record" comment made by Obama.
 
 
http://www.tmz.com/2009/09/15/obama-calls-kanye-a-jackass/ (http://www.tmz.com/2009/09/15/obama-calls-kanye-a-jackass/)     ???           


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 16, 2009, 10:21:27 PM
Joe Wilson disrespected the office of the President of the United States.
 
Obama, and wrongly so, disrespected Kanye West, who from what I can surmise, deserves no respect, even from his peers.
 
Carter is an ass. He's making Billy look good.
 
Glad I don't have cable access right now.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on September 17, 2009, 12:09:39 AM
Yet no one mentions the name-calling when it comes to Obama being the name-caller, instead they blame the news person for releasing the "off the record" comment made by Obama

There's a major difference between a casual observation made one-on-one in what was expected to be a private moment and a comment shouted before hundreds present and millions in the TV audience in a venue where protocol dictates that one act with dignity.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 17, 2009, 12:55:53 AM
disrespected the office of the President of the United States.

Disrespect seems to be the common thread in communications these days. Twenty years ago  neither mans comments would have been tolerated.
Today swiftboating, virulent personal attacking in all areas like personal choices, politics,profession, race ect.
If a man can stand up in Congress and call the President of the United States a liar on national television, then there are no limits .
The kids see this adult behavier, where the truth, or respect are not relevant, then what would they do.
There was a thread discussion about the rise in the use of behavier drugs on kids. While many have a clinical reason for taking them. Is it possible that this rise  can be partly accounted for by bad behavier driven by a lack of respect for anything.Afterall behind every tab of Ritallin is bad behavier. 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on September 17, 2009, 08:00:51 AM
disrespected the office of the President of the United States.
The kids see this adult behavier, where the truth, or respect are not relevant, then what would they do.
Amen. 

They are always watching.....and listening.....even when we don't really know it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 17, 2009, 08:30:04 AM
On a personal note, I detest hearing the word "disrespect" and any of it's plurals. I think it's overused. That being said, I wonder if Congress is going to degrade to the point of behaving like the Tiawanese Parliment anytime soon.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 17, 2009, 08:33:01 AM
I hope so. At least it'd be entertaining seeing some of 'em gettin' bitch slapped during proceedings. (Barney Frank comes to mind.) It'd be like getting vicarious licks in . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 17, 2009, 05:10:55 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125314896131518267.html#mod=todays_us_page_one (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125314896131518267.html#mod=todays_us_page_one)

Obama Used Faulty Anecdote in Speech to Congress .

So - does that mean he 'lied?' (And does my criticism of him make me a racist? And did my criticism of the Bush Administration make me a self-loathing racist?)

Meh.

There's a problem with anecdotal "evidence" to support the need for universal healthcare. I can state MANY examples of abuses in the system from people who have 100% healthcare coverage. For example, a woman who calls an ambulance because she's had a seizure. She and her son get taken to the ER. She is seen and cleared by the Doc. She did not have a seizure. She then calls her Children and Youth worker stating she and her son are stranded at the ER and need a ride home. The worker agrees to help, nut on the way home, the woman states: "Oh - by the way, I have no food in the house, could you take me shopping?"

That was the premise of the entire series of events.

When people are not held accountable for their actions and get what they "need" at the cost of someone else. Many will view that "need" as something to be taken for granted.

I have no compunction with helping the truly sick and disabled obtain healthcare coverage. Nor do I have a problem assisting folks down on their luck. However - there is a vast difference between a handout and a hand up.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 17, 2009, 11:28:59 PM
[url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125314896131518267.html#mod=todays_us_page_one[/url] ([url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125314896131518267.html#mod=todays_us_page_one[/url])

Obama Used Faulty Anecdote in Speech to Congress .

So - does that mean he 'lied?' (And does my criticism of him make me a racist? And did my criticism of the Bush Administration make me a self-loathing racist?)



Of course not. But verify everything a politician tells you.

"Self Loathing" that would be Hunter Thompson territory, and since he is not around to council you, just take any available  pharmaceuticals, and let us know if your over it tomorrow.

 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 18, 2009, 07:08:09 AM
Hunter will be nissed in the next few years I suspect. (Well - I kinda miss him now.. Vonnegut too.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 18, 2009, 07:19:52 AM
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112858205 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112858205)

The Obama Administration wants to extend certain provisions of the Patriot Act. (A misnomer if there ever was one.)

It's from NPR - so you can trust it.

The f***ing irony is killing me.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 18, 2009, 07:50:15 AM
Hunter will be nissed in the next few years I suspect. (Well - I kinda miss him now.. Vonnegut too.)

In case you didn't know it Life, your ranking on the board has it's roots in Vonnegut.

Anyhow, with the extensions of the Patriot act it does nothing moire than reaffirm the old adage of "knowledge is power" doesn't it?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 18, 2009, 11:13:34 PM
Patriot games?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 19, 2009, 08:08:42 AM
Any enterprise wherein there is a public option for the purpose of 'fostering competition' is like Jerry Jones being the Head Referee at a Cowboys game.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 21, 2009, 07:25:23 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/09/21/2009-09-21_bam_makes_a_bad_state_of_affairs_worse.html (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/09/21/2009-09-21_bam_makes_a_bad_state_of_affairs_worse.html)

I have to wonder at any President dictating to the States and an individual who is going to run and who is not.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 21, 2009, 08:01:20 AM
I wonder if this has ever happened. I'm sure that some people have been "encouraged" to run for office by a POTUS, but as far as being dissuaded from running? It is very strange indeed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 21, 2009, 11:54:29 PM
In either party who has control of the money? Both follow the rule of "toe the line, or we will find someone else who will"


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 22, 2009, 07:08:46 AM
The last three paragraphs say it all!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 23, 2009, 12:00:30 AM
I'm not sure what he means by moral dilemma. Sounds more like a family financial planning decision.
Give up your employer supplied insurance, and get your own. Instead of your employer getting the tax break on plan costs as a business expense, you get it in your W2 as income, and the gov't will give you a tax deduction, that might cover your costs. The theory as I understand it is the assumption most people will choose a lower cost/coverage than they were getting, and that will drive down medical healthcare costs. Except if you are chronically ill.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 23, 2009, 08:55:08 AM
That's the key Puffin: Healthcare works great for people that don't get sick. It's like car and house insurance that way - the companies have no incentive to take a high risk policy.
 
If you get ill or catch something nasty or heaven forbid HURT yourself & break some bones, most plans don't cover everything, especially the low cost ones. Then you get stuck with the deductibles (sorry, $3000 is a LOT of money to me & my family!). In the meantime, you are out of work & a lot of employers don't just pay you when you are out.
 
So we are back to the moral dilemma: Nobody should have to make a choice between good health care and putting food on the table. The insurance companies aren't going to give it away, if they were it would have been done long ago. That's where the gov't has to step in because private industry didn't come up with a better option.
 
If they want to come up with one now, AWESOME! Throw those ideas on the pile. I have been seeing a lot of independent health options being advertised lately, maybe private industry sees the writing on the wall and are finally giving the consumer what they want and NEED.
 
We need to make wellness programs mandatory, and kids should get everything covered at the least.
 
The only people that seem to say that the health care industry is fine are fat white men with lots of money & I would suppose the cadillac insurance plans.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 23, 2009, 04:43:04 PM
Unfortunately it's just not as simple as it sounds. Abuse of the existing public health care has been running rampant for years. Then there's the possible great opportunity we'll have for the bailout of existing healthcare providers once companies start opting-out of private plans through some loophole and go with a less expensive government plan.

The congressional majority is desperate to pass something/anything so there is not a repeat of the Clinton years. Chances are they will since they have enough stroke to pull it off. The bigger issue to me is not weather or not it's going to pass but what's going to pass. Then there's the half-assed factoror that seems to come into play whenever congress gets in a hurry (regardless of who's got the most seats)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 23, 2009, 11:34:30 PM
Tife, I agree to that particular moral dilemma of food/healthcare. In every decision there are costs and consequences.The opposite of the Obama plan is a totally private plan, with no employer supplied coverage. That costs $1000/month for a family of 4. That would be difficult for most middle class families of 4. What about those on SS? What about local, state and federal employees?
On the other hand we have the Obama plan. The answer is somewhere in the middle.
NP, your right about the abuse. The gov't is absolutely lousy when it comes to quality control in Ss, Medicare, and other gov't plans. Maybe they should hire private bounty hunters to go after the small time fraud. Go after those people who sell their SS#, and have 50 different names as payees of SS tax against their #. Disability fraud. Get pictures of the skiing, skydiving ect. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 24, 2009, 06:45:08 AM
The abuse happens at every level imaginable. The next question is what happend to the state run plans? Do they get converted over to federal programs? What about the employees? Next is the transfer of information. I spent eight years working in IT for an HMO and I can tell you with absolution that there is not a uniform method to transfer information from one entity to another let alone one state to another. This means there will be literally years of IT work to accomplish this. The HCFA 1500's and UB92's are not sufficient to accomplish this this task. Of course this means that new standards get hammered out at the federal level. I can't even imagine the chaos that is going to ensue once the providers get involved, let alone the claims processors and clearing houses.

Any transformation is going to be long and painful. I will not speak of the other evils where the feds would violate their own HIPAA standards. I don't disagree that there needs to be a public option, however what is being proposed I view as being very suspect assuming that a feasibility study has even been done.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 24, 2009, 07:36:25 AM
Quote
I can tell you with absolution that there is not a uniform method to transfer information from one entity to another let alone one state to another. This means there will be literally years of IT work to accomplish this.

 :wahoo: let's hope they hire us!
 
I also worked for a large organization that dealt with medical records (children, mental health, elderly) and all the data was held in disparate databases that weren't keyed well at all. They have been trying for 10 years to build a data warehouse so they can track people and their services accurately....
 
They are still trying, and that is one department at one state.
 
It's not a hard concept to plan, it's just the scale. And in this case I think they need to throw MORE programmers at the problem and just tackle it or it won't get done.
 
* psuedo hijack *
 
I think Obama did well at the UN. He actually addressed a lot of the concerns with Israel, Palestine and Iran without name calling, and called out the UN to get off their duff & do something and stop blaming us.
 
That's what I heard anyway with my left headphone.
 
* end psuedo hijack *


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 24, 2009, 01:02:50 PM
My take on this... Folks... many Moons ago we brought forth in this country the Office of Homeland Security. It originally wasn't suppose to cost so much that taxes had to be increased.... WOT? ??? NOT
 
It was pressed into service to... now get this.... unite and collate information on common subjects(people and cases) between the CIA, FBI, NSA, JCS, ASA and many other Alphabet orgs. To access information on something that more than one of these orgs have filed and compile it for study and action. NOT.... All these years and these Orgs still do not play well with each other. So now we have a color code and the TSA's.. WOW. Instead of Homeland as a single entity, they threw FEMA and some other agencies, into the control of Homeland.
 
Now on a local level, We have two State Government entities in ONE building in Sharon. Can they share information on a common client? ??? NO!!!!! As long as there is personal spheres of influence, there will be NO COOPERATION sans any that would benefit the administrators up the ladder.
 
It is a shame we deal with this and even more... it adds to the cost of operations to maintain informaton on one "item" in several data banks, never to be shared. In turn... the cost is passed to us... the taxpayers.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 24, 2009, 03:07:43 PM
Government efficiency.

Those too words don't go well together.

Ever.

You'd think that'd be clearly understood by now.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 25, 2009, 12:52:31 AM
It was pressed into service to... now get this.... unite and collate information on common subjects(people and cases) between the CIA, FBI, NSA, JCS, ASA and many other Alphabet orgs.

and staffed by people those same alphabet orgs deemed deadwood, expendable, no talent hangers on, who they managed to transfer to the new agency.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 25, 2009, 07:19:05 AM
The primary nature of bureaucracy being that it seeks to perpetuate its own existence by 'creating' its own necessity. The secondary nature is to obfuscate anything about it that looks unnecessary. (Which is kinda redundant - but that's the tertiary nature of a bureaucracy.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 25, 2009, 08:49:31 PM
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0909/Flout_the_mandate_penalty_Face_the_IRS.html?showall (http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0909/Flout_the_mandate_penalty_Face_the_IRS.html?showall)

A question of Constitutionality.

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0909/Ensign_receives_handwritten_confirmation_.html?showall (http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0909/Ensign_receives_handwritten_confirmation_.html?showall)

The answer given.

Despite the damn fact that this isn't included in the scope of the powers of Congress . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 02, 2009, 02:31:59 PM
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jkF2rgplcPZSZ5i5_jP_1Vq6QaogD9B33S5G0 (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jkF2rgplcPZSZ5i5_jP_1Vq6QaogD9B33S5G0)

Quote
Chicago was expected to be one of the last two cities in the race. Instead, it was the first to go.

In one of the biggest upsets in International Olympic Committee voting history, Chicago was eliminated in the first ballot Friday for the 2016 Olympics on Friday. Not even the presence of President Barack Obama and the first lady — nor a long list of celebrities — was enough to help the United States' third-largest city.

. . .

Obama was the first sitting president to lobby in person at a bid city vote.


So - was this a waste of time and money? Was it necessary to go there to lobby for this in the first place?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on October 02, 2009, 05:45:44 PM
Total waste apparently. 

Hmmm...did we pay for that crap?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 02, 2009, 06:29:24 PM
Total waste apparently. 

Hmmm...did we pay for that crap?

Always


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 02, 2009, 08:45:20 PM
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Michelle-Obama-Its-a-sacrifice-to-travel-to-Europe-to-pitch-for-the-Olympics--For-Oprah-and-the-president-too--But-were-doing-it-for-the-kids-62928957.html (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Michelle-Obama-Its-a-sacrifice-to-travel-to-Europe-to-pitch-for-the-Olympics--For-Oprah-and-the-president-too--But-were-doing-it-for-the-kids-62928957.html)

"Michelle Obama: It's a 'sacrifice' to travel to Europe to pitch for the Olympics. But I'm doing it for the kids."

OK - normally I try to stick to politeness and understatement but in this case all I have to say is: STFU!

Sacrifice? SACRIFICE?! You flew over there with freakin' Oprah in a 727 at someone else's expense to hang out in Copenhagen to make a speech and it's YOUR SACRIFICE?!?!
 
"As much of a sacrifice as people say this is for me or Oprah or the president to come for these few days, so many of you in this room have been working for years to bring this bid home."
 
I agree with the second part, but, who exactly is saying that she or Oprah or the President are making a sacrifice?

Talk about hubris . . .

I think the comments section after the article is pretty indicative of what folks are thinkin'.

You know what's cool?

No country in South America has ever hosted a modern Olympics. That's very likely why they won. Of course in much of the world's eyes - it's likely lookin' like President Obama just didn't have the stroke to pull it off. Bad move in the long run I think. And just more fodder for the press . . .

It'll be interesting to see how Rio steps up. (Very interesting given that I'm friends with a person who lives in Natal and she says the crime is outrageous. Rio is much bigger than Natal.) Pretty hot and humid down there too. The marathons oughta be good.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 03, 2009, 08:59:19 AM
Why Big Government Doesn't Work

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/10/02/why-big-government-doesnt-work/ (http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/10/02/why-big-government-doesnt-work/)

Very much worth a read and consideration. Agree or disagree, this is an article that is food for thought.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 04, 2009, 07:13:06 AM
It cost us millions for Obama to go pander to the IOC. AF1, AF2, Marine 1, the F-16's and other supporting hardware that travel with the POTUS don't fly for free. Add to that the government employed staff and entourage that travels with the president all costs a lot of money to support. Oprah may have been able to fund the trip, but it would have been a severe hit to her wallet.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on October 04, 2009, 09:53:05 AM
From what I have heard of Oprah's income and what she has socked away over the past 20 years, it wouldn't have even been a noticeable dent.  But I'm sure we paid for it.   I dunno though.  Seems somebody in the know would leak it and we would be hearing it all over the news.  But I'm still sure we paid for it.  It always goes down that way.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 04, 2009, 07:07:54 PM
Calculating the Carbon Footprint of said trip.

http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2009m10d2-Calculating-the-carbon-footprint-of-President-Obamas-Olympics-trip (http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2009m10d2-Calculating-the-carbon-footprint-of-President-Obamas-Olympics-trip)

Al Gore must be spinning in his private jet!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 05, 2009, 06:49:27 AM
Funny they didn't mention that there's more than one AF1 and that AF1'a twin typically flies ahead of AF1 on international trips. AF1 is not exactly a 747 either. Very few of its parts are interchangeable with an actual 747.  I's be willing to bet the cost of the actual trip was easily $10M+ to the taxpayers all things being said and done.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on October 05, 2009, 08:04:11 AM
Quote
The marathons oughta be good

Guarantee that no American will place. Sad. The US running community needs to do something different.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 05, 2009, 08:39:52 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704471504574449513730221946.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704471504574449513730221946.html)

What past Presidents of the AMA have to say about healthcare reform.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 06, 2009, 12:45:18 PM
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/tricky_doctored_photo_kTVWHZ3vEeRQbxCC0TNZHN (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/tricky_doctored_photo_kTVWHZ3vEeRQbxCC0TNZHN)

White House's Botched Photo-op.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2009/10/06/media-outlets-neglect-mention-doctor-photo-op-was-staged (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2009/10/06/media-outlets-neglect-mention-doctor-photo-op-was-staged)

Media Outlets neglect mention that doctor photo-op was staged.

Quote
But none of these media outlets mentioned that the White House had to hand out lab coats to a number of the doctors in attendance who showed up in business attire. Apparently trying to drive home the image of medical professionals applauding the President, the White House would not start the press conference until all of the doctors were dressed in the "spiffy" outfits, in the President's words.


So - I don't see this as anything new. But it's more a campaign trick than anything when you think about it. It's like giving out tickets to a bunch of hand-picked folks to see Cheney at Allegheny College when he travelled through here. (Except without passing out orange vests of course.) There was nothing else of substance to the speech he gave, nothing new to mull over. Same stuff - different day with lab coats.

What bugs me is that the "mainstream" media (which seems to be an apt term these days) doesn't see fit to mention this,

What I think is happeneing is that they want you to believe that propaganda is news.

And that goes for both sides of the fence.

Our Oligarchs think we're stupid.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Jayhawk on October 06, 2009, 01:04:00 PM
Staged would be if half the audience was NOT doctors but wore white coats. These apparently WERE doctors, who showed up in suits.

Staged is when a campaign won't let you bring signs into a rally but will hand you a crude, homemade-looking sign with the campaign's message o'the day.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on October 06, 2009, 07:50:34 PM
My understanding is that many of we doctors ARE NOT for the "Obamanation" of our healthcare system.  A number of of us will retire from practice, if it stresses us more than the current system does or takes away our best treatment options!  As you know, many of us don't wear "white coats" anymore with patients, especially little children who often associate that garb with pain, shots etc.  Obama is a joke on the American people and our Nation  More people will realize this with time.  He will be the Jimmy Carter Effect on the DemocRAT party. ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on October 07, 2009, 09:57:43 AM
My understanding is that many of we doctors ARE NOT for the "Obamanation" of our healthcare system.  A number of of us will retire from practice, if it stresses us more than the current system does or takes away our best treatment options!  As you know, many of us don't wear "white coats" anymore with patients, especially little children who often associate that garb with pain, shots etc.  Obama is a joke on the American people and our Nation  More people will realize this with time.  He will be the Jimmy Carter Effect on the DemocRAT party. ;D
I concur wholeheartedly! Several salient issues such as malpractice (Tort) reform and the ability to obtain insurance competitively across state lines are not even being seroiusly contemplated (No surprise with regard to the malpractice reform given that the tort lawyers and ABA own the democrats and comprise a large portion of the politicians in general). Every day I see defensive medicine come into play, so those who state that it has a minimal role in health care costs speak from ignorance.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on October 07, 2009, 01:56:27 PM
Every day I see defensive medicine come into play, so those who state that it has a minimal role in health care costs speak from ignorance.
Mmmmm.  Gotta give you this one.  Anymore, I have to have a doctors written order to use lotion or dandruff shampoo on a patient.  There was a day when I could make a decision about amultitude of things and tell the doctor about it later and assume he'd sign off on it.  Those days are gone.  I don't look cross-eyed at a patient without permission and the doctors don't write a thing without speaking to the nurses first cause they have way more contact with the patients and families.  Times they are achangin'.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 08, 2009, 02:04:30 PM
perhaps they think we are dumb because we act so dumb sometimes, and the talking head media shovels crap to us and we just accept it too.  i am  sick of politicians treating us like we are morons.

 
 here read this bit of common sense..  i mean, really it does not take a nuclear scientist to figure this out...   

http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/10/there-is-no-baucus-bill.html (http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/10/there-is-no-baucus-bill.html)
 
by:Associate Clinical Professor of Law, Cornell Law School, Ithaca, NY


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 08, 2009, 05:22:14 PM
Thanks BH. It's good to know that folks are seeing through the bullshit.

Cuz it's bullshit.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 08, 2009, 05:32:41 PM
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/10/02/why-big-government-doesnt-work/ (http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/10/02/why-big-government-doesnt-work/)

Why Big Government Doesn't Work.

Regardless of your political stripe - this is worth a read.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 08, 2009, 06:36:21 PM
more common sense. i think you will agree.

Controlling Leviathan: The Battle for Limited Government (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIS6uN-cRtQ#normal)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 08, 2009, 06:51:11 PM
NOT SO FAST MICHAEL MOORE-

question and answer session =part two of above session

Question and Answer Session: The Fight Against Big Government (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meAF15Zv490#normal)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 08, 2009, 07:58:11 PM
bh - you are awesome.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 09, 2009, 08:00:51 AM
'Peace Prize to Obama - big mistake by Nobel committee' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpheXxu9vM0&feature=player_embedded#normal)

What the Rooskies think of the latest Nobel Peace Prize recipient.

Frankly - I don't think Nobel Prizes amount to all that much anymore.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 09, 2009, 08:07:18 AM
I don't understand him being awarded the prize only 9 months into office. He hasn't really done anything yet except display intentions. Oh wait, he HAS done a great job of marketing himself.

 think in another 40 months we'll have to reconvene on this and see if it was justified.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on October 09, 2009, 08:12:08 AM
Think this might weigh heavy on his decision to send more troops? 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 09, 2009, 08:22:51 AM
(reprint)
 
As much as I try to understand all of this... POTUS Obama has been given the NOBEL PEACE PRIZE. Never understanding a "prize" given by a foundation started by a man who invented one of the highest explosives short of atomic.
 
Now not understanding that part of it was efforts... (LOL) to strive and create world peace and less nuclear weapons through coming to a table...hmmm
 
Less Nuclear??? Who has been talking to Iran and NPRK? ? ? and has America and the other (known) Nuclear Nations lessened their Nuclear Weapons yeilds??? Now they make them smaller and more accurate. and known? ? ? I have Israel in my mind.
 
Peace? ? ? Still fighting in Iraq and now more Americans may be sent to Afghanistan. And this has nothing to with ongoing military operations working under the nose of the media and citizens, in other obscure areas of our planet.
 
What were some of the promises.... less Nuclear, troops home from the Sand Box, Middle East negotiations, constructive talks with Iran and NPRK and.... cooperations reached between the Euro-Sino family. Medvedev and Putin laugh at this. Even Euro leaders laugh at our POTUS.
 
Question.... What was the Nobel Prize Panel smoking? ? ? the fumes of exploded Dynamite? Now I know his (Nobel) "intention" was to discover a safe, more effective way of helping construction. But, when the scientists at the University of Chicago (1939-1942) invented and put on line.... the worlds FIRST nuclear reactor.... do you think they actually thought of Hiroshima and Nagasaki??? Hmmmm do you think they thought about Nobels invention of detonators and dynamite and it's progression?
 
Talk means much less than actions.... to me all I have heard is hot air...
 
afterthought.... come January... will we still have a Guantanamo Detention camp? Or is it all words as usual.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 09, 2009, 08:47:46 AM
He took office 10 days before the nominations were due. So - someone nominated him for the "work" he did prior to his becoming President . . . 

He won for his speeches (cuz there hasn't been much action yet - and he's the President of a country at war in two places.) If that's the case - I don't see why every Miss America for the past 50 years who's said that world peace was her dream hasn't won a Nobel Peace Prize.

Apparently - this prize doesn't mean much anymore.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on October 09, 2009, 08:52:53 AM
"Unlike the other Nobel Prizes (http://www.newsday.com/topics/Nobel_Prize), which are awarded by Swedish institutions, the peace prize is given out by a five-member committee elected by the Norwegian Parliament. Like the Parliament, the committee has a leftist slant, with three members elected by left-of-center parties. Jagland said the decision to honor Obama was unanimous."

Does this surprise anyone now?

What is most laughable is now there are gobs of liberal miscreants cheering insanely and acting as if conveying this undeserved and admittedly meaningless award is an affirmation of their "Messiah". Hopefully he will replicate the career of another well known fellow recipient Jimmy Carter in another way and be a one-termer.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 09, 2009, 09:21:32 AM
 
Note what is in red.... What to HE ! !
Nomination regulations:
 
 
SeptemberInvitation letters are sent out. The Nobel Committee sends out invitation letters to individuals qualified to nominate – members of national assemblies, governments, and international courts of law; university chancellors, professors of social science, history, philosophy, law and theology; leaders of peace research institutes and institutes of foreign affairs; previous Nobel Peace Prize Laureates; board members of organizations that have received the Nobel Peace Prize; present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; and former advisers of the Norwegian Nobel Institute.
FebruaryDeadline for submission. The Committee bases its assessment on nominations that must be postmarked no later than 1 February each year. Nominations postmarked and received after this date are included in the following year's discussions. In recent years, the Committee has received close to 200 different nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize. The number of nominating letters is much higher, as many are for the same candidates.
February-MarchShort list. The Committee assesses the candidates' work and prepares a short list.
March-AugustAdviser review. The short list is reviewed by permanent advisers and advisers specially recruited for their knowledge of specific candidates. The advisers do not directly evaluate nominations nor give explicit recommendations.
OctoberNobel Laureates are chosen. At the beginning of October, the Nobel Committee chooses the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates through a majority vote. The decision is final and without appeal. The names of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates are then announced.
DecemberNobel Laureates receive their prize. The Nobel Peace Prize Award Ceremony takes place on 10 December in Oslo, Norway, where the Nobel Laureates receive their Nobel Prize, which consists of a Nobel Medal and Diploma, and a document confirming the prize amount. Are the nominations made public? The statutes of the Nobel Foundation restrict disclosure of information about the nominations, whether publicly or privately, for 50 years. The restriction concerns the nominees and nominators, as well as investigations and opinions related to the award of a prize.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 09, 2009, 10:40:54 AM
Nothing to do with President Obama but it's about time they seriously took a look at the BS Charlie Rangel has been doing.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/08/cbc-efforts-oust-rangel-tax-writing-post-partisan-attempts/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/08/cbc-efforts-oust-rangel-tax-writing-post-partisan-attempts/)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 09, 2009, 11:14:26 AM
 
re nobel  prize for obama: it is kind of like "form without substance"
 
but really we all know...   its "bush's fault"   :rofl:
 
Quote
MATT LAUER: There are no major foreign policy achievements to date … In some ways he wins this for not being George W. Bush.
GREGORY: That’s an inescapable conclusion.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on October 09, 2009, 12:00:30 PM
I don't understand all the Obama bashing I am reading and hearing.  It's not like he nominated himself.   


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on October 09, 2009, 12:17:59 PM
I don't understand all the Obama bashing I am reading and hearing.  It's not like he nominated himself.

How do WE know that he didn't!?! :o


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 09, 2009, 12:32:03 PM
It has not been a point or question of "WHO"....it is "WHY"????????  The timeline leaves a lot to be scrutinized as well as the why.... don'tcha think??? ???
 
 
I don't understand all the Obama bashing I am reading and hearing.  It's not like he nominated himself.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on October 09, 2009, 12:34:20 PM
Quote
How do WE know that he didn't!?! ([url]http://forum.eeticket.com/Smileys/default/shocked.gif[/url])

 
*sarcasm on*
 
Because Hermitage did.  :nahnah:
 
*sarcasm off*
  Exo 22:28 Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.
 
*sigh*[/]


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 09, 2009, 12:37:42 PM
well, who are listenting to?

i am not hearing "obama bashing"so much as the unusual way this was decided. my comment was the way the mainstream media is commenting on this.  president obama has not done anything yet but speak of peace making,  now as a matter of policy, his worldview is one of globalization  many disagree with the policy he speaks of (that would be probably the reason you would hear criticism ) many americans are for returning the usa toward less global interests and more of a soverign nation status.  obama talks of the opposite of this.  i disagree with him on this too. 

as far as media coverage of dissenters go:

there is  huge dissconnect in the media. there are actually media outlets that factcheck saturday night live skits of the president to protect him. i kid you not.... (ll look up the youtube video and post later) " it is funneh stuff" lol


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on October 09, 2009, 03:23:25 PM
Quote
How do WE know that he didn't!?! ([url]http://forum.eeticket.com/Smileys/default/shocked.gif[/url])

 
*sarcasm on*
 
Because Hermitage did.  :nahnah:
 
*sarcasm off*
 

 
TOUCHE'!!! :shakeass:


Glad to see ya back, and enjoying the additional smileys I see.

Offline until Monday morning....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 09, 2009, 04:45:05 PM
(giggle)

Barack Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize and... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31nqvyBTWis#ws-normal)

(stopped giggling at the last part . . . . )


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on October 09, 2009, 06:27:46 PM
First - I did not vote for the guy.  Seems everyone says that nowadays, huh?   But you rarely hear support for anything he wants to talk about trying.  How did this guy get into office, by such a wide margin, if everyone disagrees with him?  I am baffled by this every time I turn on the TV - or anything else for that matter.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 09, 2009, 07:34:07 PM
First - I did not vote for the guy.  Seems everyone says that nowadays, huh?   But you rarely hear support for anything he wants to talk about trying.  How did this guy get into office, by such a wide margin, if everyone disagrees with him?  I am baffled by this every time I turn on the TV - or anything else for that matter.

He got many people to the polls that had never seen a voting machine. He's a decent speaker and has some decent ideas. However he has as many ideas that I certainly don't agree with. The latter seem to be taking priority. Of course health care being close to the top of the list puts a really (I mean really) big hurdle for congress to get over right out of the gate. That's kind of problematic since that seems to take up most of their time while the more mundane, but important tasks go unaddressed. So basically he went to the bar and picked a fight with the biggest guy there and now he's hoping that he gets out alive so he can tell a story about how he stared healthcare reform right in the face and embellish some. Of course if he takes out the biggest guy in the bar he has the respect and admiration of his supporters and they get to buy rounds for the whole bar. They they borrow money from the rest of the patrons to keep buying rounds. Then they get pissed, walk away and wake up the next morning wondering where their money went and why they keep getting calls from the people they owe money too for their good time. Sounds like good night of drinking to me.

I voted for crazy old Ron Paul because he's the only one that made sense to me.

I guess that makes me crazy too.   :insane: (at least I'm sober though)





Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on October 10, 2009, 04:30:02 AM
I voted for some guy whom I had never heard of.  I just didn't know what else to do that morning.  I was sooooooo on the fence.  I remember saying to my husband after we left the polling place, "I wonder how much time would have been enough time to make a choce if we had to choose between the two"......I mean, all of us here knew early on it was going to be a tough decision. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: E-L Man on October 10, 2009, 08:43:25 AM
First - I did not vote for the guy.  Seems everyone says that nowadays, huh?   But you rarely hear support for anything he wants to talk about trying.  How did this guy get into office, by such a wide margin, if everyone disagrees with him?  I am baffled by this every time I turn on the TV - or anything else for that matter.

I did vote for him I guess mostly because he was such a good speaker unlike his stumbling, mumbling opponent. He didn't appear to be using a written speech but I'm sure he used teleprompters. I also was certain that he was promising way more than he would be able to deliver but they all do that at election time. Just take a look at the present House and Senate! What a bunch of a$$wipes. How could anyone be able to deal with that bunch of do nothing fools. Yes, I give the President credit with all he is trying to do. He is on an uphill climb all the way and I hope he succeeds And I won't always agree with some of his ideas but he is still my President.
Who in their right mind would even want this job? He is young and certainly missing a normal life with his wife and daughters. The answer is, he wants to do something for his country and it would really be nice if it happens.  :) 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 10, 2009, 08:45:18 AM
Ron Paul wasn't on the ticket here. So it was a choice between Bob Barr and the Constitutional Candidate. I chose the former . . . just giving props to the Libertarian Party.

(Plus I felt bad for him for the whole Borat thing . . . . )


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 10, 2009, 09:06:12 AM
I wrote Ron Paul in.

Lock, he is the president and I really do want him to succeed. We haven't had a president with a tremendous amount of support since JFK. Nixon would probably have been there but Watergate squashed that pretty quick. So yes, the country need a POTUS that can succeed in bringing the people together and focus the national will on reaching some kind of goal.

Anyhow, as a reality check; it's getting more difficult for any elected official to maintain public support these days. There is so much information and misinformation floating around garnering attention. The problem is that once something gets out, true or not, it's out. There was plenty of information and misinformation launched for and against Bush. The same thing is happening to Obama and it's like a runaway train. The problem is not with the people that disagree with what is happening in government, it's the people that misrepresent the facts about who is in government. Point in case are the more exaggerated statements that Obama is really a Muslim plant and that Bush took pleasure in death of US troops. The singular chaotic mass smear campaigns have devalued much of what really matters to us as a people and as a country. 

Healthy debate is good, slinging shit is another matter altogether. Yes, it's free speech, but I don't think the people that are spreading the manure truly realize just what they're growing.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 10, 2009, 11:09:05 AM
i post my opinions on here and realize no one has epiphanies due to them. no-one in their right mind would make decisions based on advice from text in a box with a chicken avatar named bighair...  i do look to people who write stuff that makes sense and offer it here.

i hope as a rule my offerings dont contradict my overall positions, (other than joking around, please dont fact check my jokes.. lol) sometimes people say and do things in contradiction thus diminishing the validity their arguments.   

this is helpful philosophical guide for debate. as far as hurling shit goes, i would like to think i dont do that, but i no doubt need a refresher read of this too.

Quote
   The Principle of Charity
[1] A simple definition of the principle of charity is that arguments must be considered in their strongest and most persuasive formulations.
[2] When we encounter new arguments, the principle dictates that we temporarily suspend our objections and focus on understanding all of the argument's complexities, nuances, and ambiguities. We attempt to repair contradictions in the argument under the assumption that our opponent is rational and that the contradictions in question may well be the fault of our own interpretation. The principle of charity is the Golden Rule of philosophical debate: We consider the arguments of others with the same care that we would have our own arguments considered.
[3] In short, every argument we encounter we interpret to its own benefit. In doing so, we not only strengthen the arguments of our opponents but the veracity of our critiques.
[4] The principle of charity carries an important corollary: When we put forward arguments of our own, we assume that our opponents are intellectually and morally capable of understanding our reasoning. Moreover, we do everything in our power to furnish truth in as clear and straightforward a fashion as circumstances allow.
[5] Why is this so important? Ideology—by which I do not refer to conservatism or modern liberalism—frequently presumes precisely the opposite, namely that most people cannot recognize truth due to their inherent biases. The ideologue is a person who claims to be beyond all bias and therefore, infallible. Of course, the truth itself is not unbiased!
[6] If, for example, a CEO argues against government interference in corporate pay structures, the principle of charity demands that we consider her argument in its strongest formulation, even if we vehemently disagree. We do not dismiss her out of hand because it may be in her personal interest to avoid governmental scrutiny of her pay. If her argument is a poor one, we bolster it as best we can under the principle of charity, and then we explain carefully and clearly why we believe her argument to be incorrect. We assume that she is intellectually and morally capable of understanding our reply; otherwise, what would be the point in replying?
[7] To assume otherwise is not harmless dishonesty in pursuit of a greater good; rather, it is dangerous mischief that undermines the entire process of political debate by failing to give all opinions a fair and equal hearing, while excluding important perspectives from the debate
[8] For the truth is frequently in one person's interest and against another's. The interests of the slave and the slaveholder are hopelessly at odds; but who would seriously suggest that the slave's argument for his freedom be dismissed because his bias and self-interest render his judgment untrustworthy?
[9] Those who wield the biases of others as a shield by which to defend their arguments succeed only in exposing the weakness of their own judgment. As the great liberal philosopher, John Stuart Mill, declared,
In the case of any person whose judgment is really deserving of confidence, how has it become so? Because he has kept his mind open to criticism of his opinions and conduct. Because it has been his practice to listen to all that could be said against him; to profit by as much of it as was just, and expound to himself, and upon occasion to others, the fallacy of what was fallacious. Because he has felt, that the only way in which a human being can make some approach to knowing the whole of a subject, is by hearing what can be said about it by persons of every variety of opinion, and studying all modes in which it can be looked at by every character of mind. No wise man every acquired his wisdom in any mode but this; nor is it in the nature of human intellect to become wise in any other manner.1

   



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 10, 2009, 11:35:39 AM
*may i have an exemption just this once to hurl some shit?  ;)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 10, 2009, 12:05:19 PM
Since when to you need an exemption? ;)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 10, 2009, 12:08:06 PM
nice one,  skippy  :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 10, 2009, 12:31:57 PM
I looked at the tool. I fall into the family of four category. I'll need to do some serious adjusting no matter what.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 11, 2009, 01:57:57 AM
Thanks - Gore - very enlightening!

MTDAW!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: E-L Man on October 11, 2009, 12:43:51 PM

I did vote for him I guess mostly because he was such a good speaker unlike his stumbling, mumbling opponent. He didn't appear to be using a written speech but I'm sure he used teleprompters.

Wow what a brilliant way to figure out how to vote...just listen to whom ever is running and if they are a good speaker lets give them a vote! ???  And to think that all these years we have tried to find out more about the candidates ...about their beliefs, morals, past accomplishments... etc... and what they think should be done in the future...what they want to try to do...when and where can they get anything accomplished...etc...before we vote. But all we had to do was to listen to them speak and then place our vote! Wow did we ever waste a lot of time in our lives before we voted in the past but now in the future you have shown us it is much easily done!!!
 
Thanks!!! ;)

Hermitage,,, Sorry I riled you with just one of my reasons why I voted for Obama. I didn't list all of my reasons because it is really none of your business. Who the hell are you to come down on me for any reason. It is none of your businness why I voted the way I did. I'll try and remember to ask you the next election who you think I should vote for! And I'll give you the same answer. You must certainly be much better schooled on politics but I still have the freedom to vote how and who I want  without your permission. I'm still a free man.   8) ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: E-L Man on October 11, 2009, 06:22:52 PM

Quote
Hermitage,,, Sorry I riled you with just one of my reasons why I voted for Obama. I didn't list all of my reasons because it is really none of your business. Who the hell are you to come down on me for any reason. It is none of your businness why I voted the way I did. I'll try and remember to ask you the next election who you think I should vote for! And I'll give you the same answer. You must certainly be much better schooled on politics but I still have the freedom to vote how and who I want  without your permission. I'm still a free man.   8) ::)



 
Easy there Big Feller...you riled no one but yourself...you stated your opinion and I stated mine...who is right and who is wrong - no one...they are mere opinions...and yes you are right that you can vote on any reason that you wish and there is no need to ask me...and yes you have the freedom to vote...and yes you are a free man...and I may be a free gal or a free man and not the best looking but I will NOT EVER let you do me even if the best lookin guy never gets here!!! ;D

 
I'm happy with that! ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 12, 2009, 01:10:58 AM
I voted for him also.My main issue was, and has been the economy for as long as I have posted  on the forums. Still is.
I also recollect that both candidates ran on platforms of change and reform. The change was in reference to the previous 8 years. So regardless of your candidate of choice, if you voted either Dem or Rep you voted for change and reform. Kinda weird how things work huh!
Anyone wanna go back to the way it was?
 
 
   


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 12, 2009, 07:41:48 AM
There's no appreciable difference between the two money parties anymore. Obama is taking the country in the same direction Bush did. there's changes on the surface, but the real subatance beneath is the same. Bush expanded the scope and control that government has more than any other President in recent memory, Mr. Obama is doing the same thig, but reaching further.

TARP and the GM and Chrysler bail-outs were band-aids. A temporary fix to a deeper problem. The economy is going to shudder deeply soon. And when inflation stikes - - - well, it ain't gonna be good. (You can't borrow / print all that money without consequence.) And all the people hoping for prosperity based on rhetoric are going to be sorely disappointed with the result in practice.

Anybody want to expand on why the Founding Fathers established the Electoral College in the first place?
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on October 12, 2009, 12:33:21 PM
Quote
I fall into the family of four category. I'll need to do some serious adjusting no matter what.

crap, I need to get a 4th job.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 12, 2009, 01:00:18 PM
"if you like just working 3 jobs you can keep just working 3 jobs"   ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on October 12, 2009, 08:03:42 PM
...I do not want to bail out anyone else...I do not want to own a car company or a bank...we need no more TARP or STIMULUS...
As unpopular as these are, maybe they worked in keeping the economy from completely collapsing.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 12, 2009, 09:40:04 PM
  As for your last question I answer YES...because I do not want to go in the direction that the POTUS and the Dems are taking us...I want less government not more...I do not want to bail out anyone else...I do not want to own a car company or a bank...we need no more TARP or STIMULUS..


Herm, I kinda picked out a couple of lines here to respond to. Going back to the way it was, without massive govt intervention would not have made things better. The lesson is what happened to Lehman Brothers. Now apply that lesson to the entire Financial system, and how it's collapse would effect the rest of the economy.
Would the unemployment rate be just 9.5%? Where would the stock market, and everyones 401K be? Home values?
Nobody really knows the answers, but the economy wouldn't be where it is today, such as it is. Most of the worst case scenarios envisioned the replay of a 1930's Great depression . Frankly, I do not agree with Obama on many things, especially Universal healthcare, but the Healthcare system needs to be reformed. All I want is for the politicians to quit their partisan BS and fix the problems. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on October 13, 2009, 08:33:03 AM
Quote
...and I would not have voted for Hillary...

tsk, tsk, Hermitage, now I KNOW we have a difference in opinion!  ;)  I almost voted for McCain/Palin just because Hillary got shafted by the Dems and the media piled on!
 
CLW: Tactile AND verbal? Not a bad deal if you can get it.  ;D
NP: Seriously, I had a dream a couple of weeks ago about Hillary. We were walking around a convention center & just talking, she was laughing, touching me on the shoulders, giving me google eyes and generally being flirtatious. This went on for what seemed like a long time with her shaking hands, talking to others and the whole time we are together it's like we were TOGETHER. It made me "happy" too.
This was one of those full color dreams with sound & everything. I didn't even wake up from the dream, it was just like I was aware that I wasn't with her any more.
Has anyone else had this dream?  ;)
What do y'all think it means?

A man can dream... :what:


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 13, 2009, 09:02:37 AM
I don't know if i would classify any dream with Hillary in it as a dream.  :shocked:


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 13, 2009, 09:59:04 PM
 :D

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-october-12-2009/cnn-leaves-it-there (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-october-12-2009/cnn-leaves-it-there)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on October 14, 2009, 12:51:41 PM
 :insane:
 
Now I know why I stopped watching network news shows...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 14, 2009, 11:22:39 PM
The stockmarket hit 10,000 for the first time in a year. Up 53% from March of this year.
Maybe just a move from bonds, and it will probably seesaw around, but 10K feels better than 6K.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on October 15, 2009, 07:47:21 AM
You're right Puffin, 10k DOES feel a lot better than 6K.
 
Watch you're investments and retirement accounts next quarter. There should be a jump. I would guess investments are back by 2/3 of what they lost last fall?
 
Rainbows & ponies....I just keep praying for our country and it's leadership.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 15, 2009, 07:57:50 AM
LOL @ bh's post - stole it for my fb page.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 15, 2009, 08:03:49 AM
Funny thing is that while the market is headed up, so is unemployment and subsequently the foreclosure rate. The banks (some anyhow) have made a great deal of money in the past quarter, but it was all through trust custody transactions. The market may be up, but the other numbers don't jive. One side needs to drop to restore balance or the whole thing is going to fall over. So either unemployment and all of the related items go down or the market goes down again.

If it stays this way the 90/10 rule will become the 95/5 rule.

I do hope something good comes out of this, but the dust hasn't even begun to settle yet.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 15, 2009, 09:12:03 AM
I have seen indicators on this "economic recovery". Here is the basic "rundown".
 
The Stimulus is suppose to kick in either in the first quarter of 2010...just in time for ELECTIONS.  :o
 
It is shown that the unemployment is the last thing to drop ... but ...don't look at the Market numbers... as in ACTUAL VALUE... it still sucks. I have to laugh when I see all the hoopla in the GOLD value.... go back and actually use inflation and it is ok but not the panacea it is made out to be. When the dollar tanks or rises..... value is "inflated" and "deflated", stocks as well as "commodities and products". ( remember the $130k home that is "revalued" at $95k...)
 
I am still trying to put my head around the one time $250 check to be issued to Social Security, Disability etc. Hmmmm didn't inflation stay flat? How are these additional Billions going to really help when it is another LOAN???? And folks.... I am one who is in line to get one of these checks so it isn't sour grapes on my part. I am just trying to figure this out. I know some items cost more but we also have items that "cost less" (as per my previous para.) It all looks like "Monkey House Math" to me.
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 15, 2009, 09:13:47 AM
"Rainbows & ponies" I like that.
 
NP, your right, all the forecasts say employment will lag behind the other indicaters. Companies are cautious about recovery . They are putting money in productivity and effeciency programs, not re-hirireing or new hires.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 16, 2009, 08:41:36 AM
IT Takes Thid Much Money to Eat with Barack Obama.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/10/barack-obama-nancy-pelosi-fundraiser-san-francisco.html (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/10/barack-obama-nancy-pelosi-fundraiser-san-francisco.html)

I just found the article interesting . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on October 16, 2009, 09:09:32 AM
I
 
I am still trying to put my head around the one time $250 check to be issued to Social Security, Disability etc. Hmmmm didn't inflation stay flat? How are these additional Billions going to really help when it is another LOAN? ??? And folks.... I am one who is in line to get one of these checks so it isn't sour grapes on my part. I am just trying to figure this out. I know some items cost more but we also have items that "cost less" (as per my previous para.) It all looks like "Monkey House Math" to me.

Simply put, this is a not so subtle attempt to assuage the anger "to be" of the largest voting class by essentially bribing them with their own (and my) money. Remember the Dems love to self perpetuate re-election by keeping their minions (welfare recipients, etc) coddled at the expense of others. They are just trying to extend this now to people who actually worked for their money and retired since they know in midterm elections that their other players usually do not come out to vote in great numbers whereas the elderly do.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 16, 2009, 11:59:30 AM
In other words. "pork" comes in all kinds of packages.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 16, 2009, 02:33:20 PM
For some levity

Sesame Street's Big Bird Wants Michelle Obama to Tell theTruth About Her Husband's Birth Certificate (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELOy2fAR_Y#normal)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 16, 2009, 04:13:57 PM
That's funny - I think.

People are gonna think you're "Anti-" NP.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 16, 2009, 07:00:23 PM
That's funny - I think.

I am nothing if not irreverent. However I probably made it on a list somewhere I suppose.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 17, 2009, 09:25:21 AM
I'm not exactly making friends either.

For one - I'm extremely pissed at the PSSU (SEIU local 668) and their cut from my paycheck which I pay involuntarily. (I'm not a member but I have to pay "fair share" because I'm covered by the contract.) I just found out there's some recourse for that . . .

I don't want to give money to an organization who's essentially in bed with ACORN.

WHICH by the way, will once again be funded by Congress on 10/31/09. The "de-funding" they voted on was temporary. A spankin' so to speak . . . but nothing permanent.

Some helpful phone numbers (if one were so inclined to call about any number of stupid things Congress is considering):

Kathy Dahlkemper:
Toll Free: 1-877-KATHY4U (1-877-528-4948)
Phone: (202) 225-5406
Fax: (202) 225-3103

Bob Casey:
Phone: (202) 224-6324
Toll Free: (866) 802-2833
Fax: (202) 228-0604

Arlen Specter:
Main: 202-224-4254
Fax: 202-228-1229
No toll free number listed for the Senator

I think a couple CALLS or FAXes (way more effective than emails) would be nice in expressing one's opinions regarding things such as the Baucus "bill" (there's nothing in writing for review) - re-funding ACORN (Casey voted against de-funding by the way. He's about as f*ckin' 'smart' as Santorum was, but he leans as far elft as Santorum was right.) - Cap and Trade is winding through the Senate as well.

I'm really starting to loathe these people.

(I'm already on the list.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 20, 2009, 01:54:21 PM
From the Chicago Sun-Times:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/huntley/1834209,CST-EDT-HUNT20.article (http://www.suntimes.com/news/huntley/1834209,CST-EDT-HUNT20.article)

I'm a little uncomfortable with the meddling with information aspects of what's happening in the 'media' and in this Administration.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 20, 2009, 02:35:37 PM
Interesting article Life. It's all about where the camera is focused (or not) nobody is allowed to see the big picture? Seriously, if Obama loses press support he's gonna be screwed. I wonder when congress will eventually get around to announcing the formation of State Arm Insurance to take care of us? That will distract the public for a while but they'll eventually get focused on other issues after a while.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 21, 2009, 12:41:51 AM
I wonder what Rakey would tell you about her SS COLA!
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 21, 2009, 06:40:59 AM
Speaking of Rakey, she signed up here and hasn't made a single post.

My parents are pretty agitated about the SS COLA too.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 21, 2009, 12:43:27 PM
People are now saying it's not so much that this Administration is a throwback to Carter's - but the anti-criticism stance is taking in more reminiscent of Nixon's. A few thoughts:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/10/21/lamar-alexander-tennessee-senator-obama-enemies-list-nixon/ (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/10/21/lamar-alexander-tennessee-senator-obama-enemies-list-nixon/)

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/64089-alexander-warns-obama-against-keeping-enemies-list# (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/64089-alexander-warns-obama-against-keeping-enemies-list#)

http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/65164977.html (http://www.620wtmj.com/shows/charliesykes/65164977.html)

Curiouser and curiouser . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 22, 2009, 12:29:22 AM
Compared to Nixon! Not even close Life.
 
Check this out! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon's_Enemies_List (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon's_Enemies_List)
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 22, 2009, 07:18:16 AM
I'm not comfortable with their literal censoring of Humana and the salvo against the US Chamber of Commerce. OK - maybe not Nixon (I know ya got a soft spot for him) - but - cripes . . . it ain't good.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 22, 2009, 07:20:24 AM
 
Just a thought.... wikipedia is NOT the most reliable source to prove a point.... Not saying that Nixon didn't have a list but.... he learned his lesson .... Newspapers buy ink by the barrel and it was for naught on his part. But...don't rely on the media and then kill one entity in front of the others... It makes the rest of the herd nervous.
 
Compared to Nixon! Not even close Life.
 
Check this out! [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon's_Enemies_List[/url][/] ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon's_Enemies_List[/url])


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 23, 2009, 12:20:32 AM
Yeah Life, even Clinton wasn't close to Nixon.
 
They all can push back pretty good when they want to, like the Plame thing.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 23, 2009, 11:45:06 PM
Herm, that is a good article. Having lived in Chicago for a number of years, I would rate that as deserving of a shrug. Not really something unusual for a native. Politics is played out in the open there , not behind the scenes. But always entertaining.
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on October 24, 2009, 01:37:15 AM
There's not much in that article I agree with!

I don't have a problem with what they did to Humana.
 
 From Wikipedia:
---------------------
 On September 21, 2009 the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Health_and_Human_Services) opened an investigation into mass mailings sent by Humana to elderly Medicare recipients.[12] The mail was made to appear to contain official information about Medicare Advantage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Advantage) and prescription drug benefit information, but instead alleged that core Medicare benefits could be cut by the Obama administration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama_administration)'s healthcare reform,[13] a claim refuted by the non-partisan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-partisan) website (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Website) FactCheck (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck)[14] and John Rother, AARP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARP)'s executive vice president.[15] Douglas Elmendorf, the head of the Congressional Budget Office (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_Office), later supported the claim that Medicare benefits would be cut.[16] However, his comments were in reference to just one of several bills being drafted in Congress, and CBO estimates of another healthcare reform bill found that changes to premiums would vary.[17] Because these mailings may have been paid for by public money provided to Humana for Medicare Advantage and possibly violated terms of their contract, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centers_for_Medicare_and_Medicaid_Services) instructed Humana to cease all such mailings to Medicare plan members pending an investigation.
---------------
 
 And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is obviously anti-consumer so whatever it is that they did to them is fine with me!
 
 And the health insurance companies should be stripped of their federal antitrust exemption.
 
 And there's nothing wrong with giving Arizona the option of forfeiting their stimulus money.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 24, 2009, 08:24:34 AM
Are you my mental Doppelganger???? You scare me....  ;)
 
Well I guess that I was asking for some answers or opinions and felt that I should give mine: Before someone answers me with a question (the Democratic or Political way)!!!
 
I am not happy with the POTUS and the POTUS admin. trying to silence anyone's opinion (even if there opinion is right or wrong)...
 
I am not for bigger government...but am for less...have not seen where bigger government involvement has ever helped anything...
 
I am not for the government telling someone how much their wage should be...that should be for the Board members and stock holders (more about this in my next opinion) to say...
 
I am not for the government telling anyone how much profit they can make and what to do with their profit...I am 100% for Capitalism and feel the people should state what and how much a corporation or business should make in profits by buying or using or not buying or using their product or service if they agree or disagree with their business practice...
 
 
Do not and did not agree with the Tarp, stimulus or bailouts...to many reasons to explain...
 
I do watch many News outlets and read a few different papers to see what is going on and to see what opinions are going on and take from there and form my own opinions (again maybe right or wrong)...
 
I will even give my opinon on HealthCare...I do not see much wrong with the HealthCare in the USA and think that we have the BEST in the World...there might be a problem with costs for some but I do not have the answer for that and if I did I would be working somewhere else, but I do have an opinion and it is that I do not WANT the government taking over the HealthCare system...
 
 
I also want to clarify that even if I do not agree with your opinion that I do not hate you as a person and do not hold it against anyone, that I treat it as just that....an opinion!!!
 
 
And as you may see I am not happy in which the POTUS and his Admin. are taking us... :(   >:(
 
And this is not the CHANGE that I was hoping for...not even close!!! :o
 
Now I am done and it is time to get ready for GAMEDAY....WE ARE...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on October 24, 2009, 01:02:36 PM
Hermitage,
Obama's criticism of Fox is accurate but he should have kept it to himself.
I just learned he tried to exclude Fox from the press pool regarding access to interview one of his staff, so I definitely don't agree with that!http://www.examiner.com/x-19663-LA-Legal-Examiner~y2009m10d23-White-House-press-pool-thwarts-Fox-News-exclusion (http://www.examiner.com/x-19663-LA-Legal-Examiner%7Ey2009m10d23-White-House-press-pool-thwarts-Fox-News-exclusion)

I'm not necessarily FOR bigger govt. but if corrupt corporations need policed, then so be it.

They're only regulating the wages of the seven or so companies that had their hand out for bailout money.  Since the govt. is a shareholder in these companies now anyway, I don't have a problem  with this.

On the one hand I don't like the idea of bailing out companies but on the other, this may have helped to avert an even bigger meltdown.  We'll never know.

Health Care:
-Something needs to be done!
-I think we need to take the profit out of health insurance. 
-I think it's a good idea to pool as many people as possible to get the lowest rates.
-I don't agree with any govt. limiting your choice of Dr.
-By the way, aren't most people satisfied with Medicare?

Paying For Health Care:
-Obama will probably be more generous to poor people than I would but what are you gonna do.
-We could start by using the savings from ceasing to police the world!

IMO, Obama up to this point is a failure and a disappointment but I have no reason to believe that McCain would suit me any better.  Actually if McCain were president we'd probably be in the middle of WW3 getting our asses kicked by China, Russia and Iran!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 25, 2009, 10:30:46 AM
It is shown ...even in the new programs, there is a hole in the boat. Cash For CLunkers DID NOT WORK. In fact it is shown to have caused even more problems. The $8000 for first time home buyer has amassed investigations into less than honest use.... Unqualified parents are setting up home buying for their children... not so bad when first heard but as you find out..... Under 18 Year Olds???? Even a 4 Year Old.... WTF!!!!
 
We need present laws enforced and this crap thoroughly investigated. It shows me that it is a lot of OUR OWN are screwing us..... damn...where is that vaseline????? ??? :o . Catch 'em, try 'em, put 'em away...... now ...not years from now.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 25, 2009, 01:17:13 PM
I thought this to be interesting....
 
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091025/D9BI4D6O1.html (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091025/D9BI4D6O1.html)
 
 
Yahoo, Tupperware and the Railroads may be the next target.....
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 26, 2009, 12:05:41 PM
Yet another good reason why a Public Health System may not be the best.... Listen to this guy and multiply him by 2000 ...JUST IN HIS AREA OF FLORIDA. No one seems to want to expend the effort or monies to check anything. ENFORCE OUR LAWS and see how much money we could have in the Government Coffers...then add saving of not financing every stupid thing like the "study of sexual relations of rocks". We have become gullible and complacent beyond belief.
 
 
http://dailybail.com/home/medicare-fraud-a-60-billion-crime-cbs-60-minutes-october-25.html (http://dailybail.com/home/medicare-fraud-a-60-billion-crime-cbs-60-minutes-october-25.html)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on October 26, 2009, 02:49:48 PM
Speaking of waste, anybody remember when Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon can't account for $2.3 Trillion?  Of course not.  He made that announcement on 9-10-01!
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 26, 2009, 03:30:22 PM
Nice one. Absolutely true. The problem is big gvernment. Not who runs it . . . which apparently is more of the same - but quicker:

http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0910/obama_ties_bush_on_golf.html (http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0910/obama_ties_bush_on_golf.html)

Barack Obama has played more golf in 9 months than bush had in 2 years - then Bush quit playing in office. Apparently the media liked to portray him as a golf playing pinhead (I.e. Farenheit 911) - but numbers be told . . . well . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 27, 2009, 09:24:29 AM
Is the Executive Branch accountable to Congress? According to the Constitution - yes. According to this Administration (and the one previous to this'n I might add) - maybe not so much . . .

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/23/czar-war-escalates-between-congress-white-house/?feat=article_top10_read (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/23/czar-war-escalates-between-congress-white-house/?feat=article_top10_read)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on October 27, 2009, 10:03:09 PM
Paying the enemy to switch sides!

It worked for Bush in Iraq.

Now Obama is gonna try it in Afghanistan.

What happens when the money dries up?  Or will it?  Pathetic!
http://www.reuters.com/article/gc05/idUSTRE59Q4LH20091027 (http://www.reuters.com/article/gc05/idUSTRE59Q4LH20091027)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 27, 2009, 11:40:05 PM
I see no appreciable difference in the Money Parties anymore. They may espouse ideology - but the ends are becoming the same. Freedoms have been curtailed for quite some time now.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 28, 2009, 07:02:38 AM
To add to the reading list, here's a pretty even handed piece (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20091027/pl_politico/28764) about some parallels and differences between the current administration and the previous one. The article failed to address the patriot act, its criticisms and how it somehow managed to find better legs under the current administration. Actually they could have written an expose' on the whole thing but given the publics attention span it would not get read in its entirety.

As Life said, there isn't much difference between the two parties any longer. it's the same crap. It just now has a new shiny foil wrapper with "new improved taste" stamped on the side. The fat content is the same with just the right amount of salt and special sauce to disguise what your really getting fed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 28, 2009, 11:14:15 PM
http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2009/oct/28/ha-over-the-top-but-on-the-mark/ (http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2009/oct/28/ha-over-the-top-but-on-the-mark/)

The Tampa Tribune's take on Glenn Beck.

Some of Mr. Beck is to be taken with a grain of salt, but this dude that worte the article (not a Beck fan) hits it pretty dead on. No-one in the "Mainstream Media" reports on the backgrounds of Mr. Obama or the people he has surrounded himself with in the Administration.

So - are we a republic? Or are we something else now?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 29, 2009, 09:06:58 PM
Didn't get to see it. Looks like the story got yanked. Hmmmm  :-\


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 30, 2009, 07:46:41 AM
A letter I just sent to Kathy Dahlkemper:
 
"Thank you for the email regarding the issue of healthcare reform. While I agree that healthcare (specifically payment / insurance) reform is necessary in the U.S. - I do not believe that a government run option (nor triggers for one) is the solution. I believe that smaller incremental steps are necessary. The Federal Government does NOT efficiently manage anything (the most recent example being the fraud occuring with the first time home buyers tax credit) and adding another layer of bureacracy to an already burgeoning system is - well - frankly - it's just not all that smart.
 
As for transparency - - - it's always been there for constituents who know where to look. This whole thing (especially the Senate's Baucus "Bill") has been a case of Congress and the current White House Administration doing whatever they want behind close doors. A CONCEPT got out of committee. (Is that really transparent?) And since when is 72 hours long anough to peruse 1990 pages of legalese?
 
There are better options. Eliminate State lines being the 'limit' of coverage for insurance companies. Eliminate the denial of pre-existing conditions. Cut out the fraud and abuse that occurs in medicaid and medicare and then raise the ceiling on financial eligibility for those programs.
 
The Government option for paid healthcare insurance is tantamount to Jerry Jones refereeing a Cowboy's game. The rulemakers should not have a stake in the outcome. Sensible regulation makes sense - but the regulators should not stand to benefit from their own regulation. (Like - um - cash for clunkers and GM. If the government 'owns' a large stake in GM and then creates an incentive program using government money for people to buy GM cars - was there really any gain it that? I mean - really?! Does the Federal Government really think we're all that stupid?)
 
I strongly urge you TO VOTE AGAINST anything that includes a public option (ot 'triggers' for a public option) for healthcare reform. I do look at your voting record Ma'am. I appreciate your "NO" vote on Cap and Trade (though through my cynical understanding Congressional machinations, that likely might have been because you had someone's blessing to do so to 'save' your seat) - but I will do everything in my power to campaign against your re-elcetion if you vote "YES" on this legislation.
 
Thank you for your service to the people of your District.
 
Sincerely,"
 
ME
 
I urge folks of like mind to do the same. And if you are of a differing opinion - write about THAT too! It's about time individual voices are heard more clearly through these types of issues. I also urge you to call your House and Senate Reps and say the same things!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 30, 2009, 01:01:14 PM
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=25668 (http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=25668)

http://www.americansforprosperity.org/files/househealthcarebillbreakdown8-6-9.pdf (http://www.americansforprosperity.org/files/househealthcarebillbreakdown8-6-9.pdf)

The second analysis of the bill seems a little more balanced - though either analysis points to WAY TOO MUCH government power.

If you think the Obama Administration is IN ANY WAY about change from the evils of the Bush Administration - you are sadly mistaken. This is a continuation of the erosion of our civil liberties . . .

There is more in this bill than just healthcare folks.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 30, 2009, 04:57:09 PM
FYI - the actual number of the house Bill (now) is HR 3962. the links above are for a previous version HR 3200. however - the gist is generally the same.

So Google HR 3692 and put on your reading glasses and break out your note taking materials and your legal dictionaries!

I love the f*cking transparency . . . don't you?



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 31, 2009, 07:17:05 AM
"Few things can march a great power down the road of decline faster than irresponsible economic policies -- and huge debt is most often the drum leader of the pack."

Massive Debt to Drive U.S. Decline (http://www.heritage.org//Press/Commentary/ed103009a.cfm)

that being said, some insight into the latest health care bill debacle: (includes links to cbo etc.)

http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/hostedemail/email.htm?h=bca752264d2c65ec003539268b935709&CID=5108088678&ch=48CCFB28468D47D4393C3B15E0D09233 (http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/hostedemail/email.htm?h=bca752264d2c65ec003539268b935709&CID=5108088678&ch=48CCFB28468D47D4393C3B15E0D09233)

 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 31, 2009, 08:36:05 AM
So Google HR 3692 and put on your reading glasses and break out your note taking materials and your legal dictionaries!

I better get my new reading glasses before they become unaffordable.

Interesting link BH. The payroll tax mandate will screw mom and pop businesses the hardest. It won't help the rest of us either.  Too many concessions have to be made by us. There has to be a better, more economically feasible way.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 31, 2009, 08:39:55 AM
Thanks BH. Gotta love the myppic nature of our species. Folks want what they want when they want it - and apparently they're willing to sacrifice future security and freedom to get it!

The Redhead and I talk about emigrating . . . but there's no place to emigrate too. This nation is (as Reagan said) the last great beacon of freedom. And this is going to change things. People just don't recognize how. Either they're too naive or they're desirous of this type of change.

Either way . . .

Not good.

I can't become a species expatriate - can I?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 31, 2009, 10:55:32 AM
an article  sent to me from a friend:

THE GDP MIRAGE  (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_45/b4154034724383.htm)

 

ok, im done for today. ive got to find something more positive to dwell on. laundry, that sound like fun...

*edit coz i could not get the other link to work... sorry.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on October 31, 2009, 10:07:22 PM
 
Are Liberals Smarter Than Conservatives? (http://www.american.com/archive/2009/october/are-liberals-smarter-than-conservatives) :D

this is a very interesting read. maybe not what you think. it was not what i thought. it was fascinating. and really SMART.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on November 02, 2009, 11:09:07 AM
Thanks BH. Gotta love the myppic nature of our species. Folks want what they want when they want it - and apparently they're willing to sacrifice future security and freedom to get it!

The Redhead and I talk about emigrating . . . but there's no place to emigrate too. This nation is (as Reagan said) the last great beacon of freedom. And this is going to change things. People just don't recognize how. Either they're too naive or they're desirous of this type of change.

Either way . . .

Not good.

I can't become a species expatriate - can I?

I am also exploring the concept of becoming an ex-pat. It is frustrating as hell to have my family and my descendents have to deal with the enormous mess that is being produced. There are things being added on to our nations budget and subsequent debt load that cannot be readily undone. An apt analogy is that you cannot unburn a piece of paper. That is what the Dems are doing... burning our future to satisfy their vast conglomeration of entitlement voters which self perpetuates their continued ascendence. When the proverbial fecal material hits the rotating primitive air conditioner, even "taxing the rich" to poverty levels will not save this sinking ship.
 
Life...check into the Island nation of Nevis.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 02, 2009, 03:08:22 PM
The blueprint for dismantling the Capitlist system and sh*tcanning the Constitution.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6967 (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6967)

Check it out.

Conspiracy theory?

Or is it really happening?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on November 02, 2009, 09:26:54 PM
Congress just passed and the Pres. just signed a 680-billion-dollar military budget bill for the 2010 fiscal year.  That's just for ONE year!  Where's the outrage?  The health care bills cost about a trillion or so spread over ten years! 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 02, 2009, 09:45:12 PM
Nobody seems to want to fix things anymore.
Just sh%tcan everything and start over with something new. That'l fix it! :o
 
Except I have never seen any reasonable suggestion as to what we should replace everything with, not a whiff of how to execute it if someone had a plan. What it would cost or what the consequences would be.
 
Thats kinda like we could have some ham & eggs, if we had some ham, and eggs, and a frying pan, and..........
 
Is the "Decision Tree " dead?
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 02, 2009, 10:02:10 PM
Congress just passed and the Pres. just signed a 680-billion-dollar military budget bill for the 2010 fiscal year.

The defense budget has been increasing since 2001.
The defense budget also does not include costs  for the wars, nor long term spending for veterans. Those funds are discretionary funds, that are in addition to the defense budget. Kinda quarterly time payments. I havn't seen a groundswell of oppostion to this defense spending, but maybe I just missed it.




Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on November 03, 2009, 09:51:18 PM
That's my point Puffin.  Spend 680 billion dollars in a year and say that it's for "defense" and nobody questions it.  Spend 100 billion dollars per year for health care (1 trillion divided by 10) and all of a sudden people become deficit hawks.  Seems a little hypocritical.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on November 03, 2009, 10:32:53 PM
A GREAT day here in Virginia for we Conservatives and all in our Commonwealth.  Also it is nice that for a change, everyone I voted for, WON!   :)   The DemocRATS should take notice of the possible backlash they are causing with their Socialistic-Marxist-antiGod-antitraditional marriage-etc., agenda.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 04, 2009, 01:19:29 PM
I do agree with some elation... Virginia and Joisey... had to come to this..I even watched the NY 23 and saw just how CLOSE the Conservitive came to a W... not bad... time to hone the skills. Then we see the likes of Bloomberg..... even with his $100,000,000 to fund his campaign.... hmmmm a lot of money to spend to have your opponent so close in the final tally. Hope all that money was worth it. I wonder what other things $100,000,000.00 could buy? ? ? ?
 
Now locally.... here in my home of Sharon/Mercer County. We now have an Independent on City Council...Good stuff. And now to the Treasurer's race. I don't listen to WPIC from 8 AM- 10AM because I was requested not to call in anymore. I had a transgression and immediately apologized so.... not a part of it anymore and the more I ask around... there are others who seem to have been dropped from the WPIC Airwaves. We are now down to 10 hours of local talk out of 168 hours a week of broadcast time... sans local games the rest is syndicated.... Seems there weren't enough people available at WPIC to do the Election results tuesday night.... maybe I can see that if there are what I heard to be 4 employees of the station. So I digress.... I caught a news burp from WPIC and heard Mrs. Roberts Biros quip on why Mrs Richardson won. Hmmmm one was she had people working on her campaighn and wow..she even had the backing of her..OMG... Party. What did Mrs. Biros think politics was? ? ? ? an icecream social? It may have been a help when the qualification were published that she not have left the EDUCATION question blank. I see even the Cat Box Rag of a paper in our valley listed her and a "Blogger". To me all I was able to deduce out of knowing about her for a year or so.... she uses the computer a lot... Hmmmm IT could that mean she sells stuff on E-Bay?? Web designer? My son builds web pages and he still has a full time job. Even I have put a few together for my own uses...not rocket science and... what does that have to do with an ability to handle MILLIONS of dollars. So, she goes on WPIC and makes excuses why she didn't win? Where is the Cheese with that? I live in a precinct that is about 10 to 1 DEM to GOP. Mrs. Richardson, though she lost my precinct... lost it by about 33%.... Hmmmm gotta make you think.... Party Backing? ? ? ?
 
Rule one.... if you win... do the best job you can.... if you lose.... be gacious enough to congratulate your opponent and not make excuses for your loss on the open airwaves. It makes you look bad. Now... let me get back to my E-Bay account...I think I just sold some bronzed Dog Scat for $45 ... My lucky day and my manufacturer is hard at work in the yard *S* and I pay him in Kibble. A win-win ...dontcha think? ? ? ;)
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: JimV on November 04, 2009, 03:33:15 PM
Lifetime, I have to agree with you that WPIC is an abysmal joke these days.  I too no longer listen to the Joe Biro Daily Sewer Bill Bitch-fest (seriously, can the guy talk about ANYTHING else?).  Basically I left with Ron Errett, and I don't regret it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on November 04, 2009, 09:48:07 PM
I don't listen to WPIC from 8 AM- 10AM because I was requested not to call in anymore.
LOL, that's hilarious for some reason!
 
 So in other words you were BANNED?
 Maybe if you disguised your voice you could keep calling in.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 04, 2009, 10:18:56 PM
Spend 100 billion dollars per year for health care and all of a sudden people become deficit hawks.  Seems a little hypocritical.

Your right there. The ammount of money in these programs is staggering.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on November 04, 2009, 11:02:52 PM
 ;D
A GREAT day here in Virginia for we Conservatives and all in our Commonwealth.  Also it is nice that for a change, everyone I voted for, WON!   :)   The DemocRATS should take notice of the possible backlash they are causing with their Socialistic-Marxist-antiGod-antitraditional marriage-etc., agenda.

-WOW -Don't hold back just let er go - say what you feel!  ;D ;) ;D   You just gotta Luv someone that is not afraid to say what's on their MIND!  :thumbsup:   :thumbsup:
HERMIT,  Anyone who has known me knows that this is the way I am.   ;D 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2009, 07:19:17 AM
I was putting it nicely but yes.... banned... but in hindsight.... not a bad deal. They are falling apart at the seams as it is and I have heard it "ain't" getting better.... but on this matter..you would have also read " I had a transgression and immediately apologized ( I said the phrase
" Money talks and Bull.... walks" without the dots.... Oh MY!!! It slipped and I was told to "stay home"...) so.... not a part of it anymore " and that should have given you all the info you really needed. What was interesting was that I was almost a regular and when Errett left, was even asked to possibly consider getting onboard. I like Ron and even if I could have, would not have. Besides.... I don't own a restaurant.
 
Well this is WPIC's burden to deal with. I have no horse in that race other than we may be close to losing yet another local voice media.  Many have quit listening when Errett left and many even went to WKBN. I personally think their parent company could care less.
 
Now you know the rest of the story  ;) . Happy now??
 Oh..and my voice is very hard to disguise. I go out in public and even up until a few days ago, people have approached me and asked if I am THAT guy who calls on WPIC. They recognize my voice but don't really know me. I also haven't gotten that hard up to have to disguise my voice to get my point out. I will take responsibility for what I say... no need to hide... that isn't me.
 
 
I don't listen to WPIC from 8 AM- 10AM because I was requested not to call in anymore.
LOL, that's hilarious for some reason!
 
 So in other words you were BANNED?
 Maybe if you disguised your voice you could keep calling in.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 06, 2009, 03:14:14 PM
The more I see and hear from our current Commander in Chief - the less confidence I have in him. This is truly right up there with: "Now watch me hit this drive."

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html (http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html)

From his power centralizing agenda to his prolific golf game, to police acting stupidly to this . . . the more I see . . .

Well, I really think that a choice between two hand-picked Money Party morons is not a choice . . . . 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 08, 2009, 08:27:06 AM
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll887.xml (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll887.xml)

Ms. Dahlkemper didn't agree with me . . . her prerogative.

On to the Senate . . . where one who is opposed to this ifasco is not likely to get any satifaction from Casey or Specter . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 08, 2009, 10:14:34 AM
Seems at least Altmire got this right...... This bill passed by 3 votes ...the game is that once this bill passed the needed numbers...the weak DEMS ...most in their first term were told they could vote against it in order to placate those in their districts who were against this bill and enhance their ability to be re-elected. This is an old "Chess Play" that both parties use to ensure a party seat chance. What this shows me, this was more about the political longevity of the legislators over the actual bill.
 
Now we take this farce to the Senate.... a harder attempt.... They will need 60 votes to shut down possible filibuster and from what is shown.... is an uphill battle.
 
This is all in MY HONEST OPINION. I am by far, no expert, and never claimed to be.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 09, 2009, 04:25:21 PM
told they could vote against it in order to placate those in their districts who were against this bill and enhance their ability to be re-elected. This is an old "Chess Play" that both parties use

thats why politicians are just slightly behind child molesters in terms of who is most reviled.

So, they vote against the legislation, trumpet it loudly to their constituents, then slyly insert an earmark into the legislation they voted against, knowing it will pass.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on November 09, 2009, 09:16:31 PM
I just saw a commercial (on Hannity) for that.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on November 13, 2009, 02:21:02 PM
"And George W. Bush doesn’t seem so bad after all."



http://hillbuzz.org/2009/11/10/thank-you-former-president-george-w-bush-and-former-first-lady-laura-bush/ (http://hillbuzz.org/2009/11/10/thank-you-former-president-george-w-bush-and-former-first-lady-laura-bush/)

 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on November 13, 2009, 03:46:39 PM
I sincerely thank you BH for that link. I repeatedly became choked up reading both the blog as well as many of the comments. I dearly hope that America can open its collective eyes in time to save itself from the present path. I fear what is being shoved down our throats now will do irreparable damage if they succeed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 13, 2009, 06:57:08 PM
Mmmmmm - no. Not so much.

Not a fan of either the R's and D's. Taking a macro view - they both are equally culpable for the mess we're in.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 14, 2009, 08:14:00 AM
Yeah - that is a funny picture. I'd like to see one of our current President that looks like that. But I betcha there isn't one to be found. Either because, that's not his personality or because nothing looking like that would ever get 'out..'


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 16, 2009, 09:47:29 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539284255805824.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_business#articleTabs%3Darticle (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539284255805824.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_business#articleTabs%3Darticle)

"General Motors Co. reported a $1.15 billion loss for a shortened third quarter, providing the first evidence of the auto maker's improvement since emerging from bankruptcy protection."

A 1.15 billion dllar loss is an improvement. I guess 10% unemployment is too!

I've heard of Opposite Day - - - but apparently, this is Opposite Year!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 16, 2009, 11:16:19 AM
For God's sake.... Did you not know that the 10K stock market is a sign of economic improvement.... now don't look at why... expanded layoffs and shutting down plants... Hmmm money not spent heads into the P list...
 
Well the weather/oceans are getting warmer, hence Global warming a "fact"...oh and don't forget Cooler weather and more ice at Antarctica... Oh yessss. I forgot... Global Warming TOOOOOOOO.
 
Everything tends to follow the course of WHO READS WHAT and WHO POSTULATES WHAT. I came home to go outside and drove as I walked miles. I fed my dog and he has hairballs, and had to cut grass and spread salt on my walks. ? ? ? ? ? ? ?  ???  Now a LESS of a loss is a PROFIT???? WTF!!!! Good time to buy homes and gold.... LOL while the DOLLAR VALUE is down.... Get real!!!! A $150,000 home is really valued at $95,000 and...the dollar hasn't even tanked yet. I have a MILLION DOLLAR Baseball card.... anyone have a MILLION DOLLARS.... Hmmmm how much is that in INFLATION dollars????? Folks.... values can go UP on paper but they are still within the original VALUE range. What is the REAL value of GOLD???? is it really a $1000 VALUE??? or has inflation taken a bit of that??? 10.2% may be an average but we all know it is NOT the true level.... it is much higher and regionally terrible. LOL now we dance when ONLY 500,000 people lost their jobs.... What in hell is wrong with all of this????? Reality vs Perception. We reval at cash for clunkers without looking at the real cost..... higher prices for the used car market minus the 700,000 shredded usable used cars.... now maybe 700K people now have another payment...for a temporary new car. Just what we needed.... more debt. Now Car dealers nation wide are some of the QUIETest places in America... We have Temporary auto line start ups until... the stock gets to a point and guess what..... lay offs again. You are right...I am not smiling and MY glass is NOT half full. I am not a believer in Santa and the Easter Bunny as well as a Fairy that requires me to have my teeth pulled or worse ...Knocked out.
 
This isn't from the Right or Left, this is from those who have been and are now IN CHARGE. You remember them???? the ones who don't listen to their employers or the ones who listen to the quickly devalued AMERICAN GREENBACK.
 
My opinion only
 
 
[url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539284255805824.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_business#articleTabs%3Darticle]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539284255805824.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_business#articleTabs%3Darticle ([url]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539284255805824.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_business#articleTabs%3Darticle[/url])[/url]

"General Motors Co. reported a $1.15 billion loss for a shortened third quarter, providing the first evidence of the auto maker's improvement since emerging from bankruptcy protection."

A 1.15 billion dllar loss is an improvement. I guess 10% unemployment is too!

I've heard of Opposite Day - - - but apparently, this is Opposite Year!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 16, 2009, 09:37:38 PM
I guess I'm an optomist. I see the market at 10K better than the market at 6K. I'm happy there is a financial market at all rather than a complete collapse. The autosale forecast for 2009 have not gotten worse than what was predicted in Feb. The unemployment forecast in Feb was that it would peak at around 10.5% in 2Q10. Maybe, hopefully its peaking now, a qtr ahead of forecast. Maybe not, but forecasts still say peak is 10.5%.. I'm happy, that after 6 quarters of decline in economic growth, 3Q2009 was at +3.5%. I'm happy, that after declining since 2006, it looks like the housing starts have bottomed out. I think it's good news that our deficit with China is down 16% year to year . When will things get back to where we were in 2002. Maybe 5 years.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 16, 2009, 10:46:44 PM
Puffin: Like I alway say, rainbows & ponies!!!!  ;D
 
ps. glad you're here, you always have a good take on things and I appreciate that.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 17, 2009, 07:40:27 AM
Quote
Don't Worry... Be Happy...

Now I have that song stuck in my head  :frustrated:
 
Seriously, it just saddens me to see how The President is being viciously attacked....usually by people (not here, but in my physical life) that have NOTHING whatsoever to do with changing ANYTHING, and whos lives are in such dissaray that I wonder if complaining about The President is their way of ignoring their own sorry pathetic lives.
 
I am talking about people here that I am around all day, and quite frankly, wouldn't say hello to on the street.
 
I like to look at the bright side of life because I USED to be a Negative Nancy, and it got me nowhere FAST.
 
Hey, the economy IS doing better, investors SEEM to be a bit more positive, with a few exceptions (Detroit, MIami, Las Vegas) the housing market has stabalized, and these holidays look like they are going to be a bit more festive than last year.
 
Hey, I grew up in Meadville in the 70's when unemployment, to me, seemed to be about 100%  ;)  ot was probably higher than now, and interest rates were like 12%.
 
Not only was I poor, people I thought were rich were poor.
 
So yea, I would rather just keep chipping away at the issues in my own life than sit and complain about something I have no control over.
 
Now I'm going to click 'Post' without reviewing this because I'm feeling a little sassy on this Tuesday  :cross:


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 17, 2009, 07:52:39 AM
(((laughing at Tife)))  :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 17, 2009, 07:52:52 AM
When 500,000 more lose their jobs and it is less than normal and we think that is a positive.... When we go to our banker and think they care one iota what we are saying to them and think we are making progress... when we now are using food stamps and such a high rate and think we are caring for our own even more.....when Foreclosure is still high and in many places growing and we are told new housing starts are up... How many are buying in return for how many are losing? ??? Hmmmm And that is if those buying new homes can hold on to them..... I still think the glass is half empty. If we think we can sing "Don't Worry, Be Happy" and that is suppose to make this go away... we just may be in trouble. We are mathematically pathetic.... Gold up 17%!!! what?? 17% up from the 2% increase it had... that is not 17 cents on the dollar...that is 17% of 2%.... We have so many jugglers of numbers we begin to love fuzzy math. I would rather have, in essence full employment, 5% and the stock market at say 8000 rather than 10.2+ and it is 10K+. When this happens like it has... companies have made their profits rise by killing jobs.... mostly at the lower levels.... This has even hit Microsoft, and many of the past lucrative computer based businesses. All businesses of size adjust profits from the lower end... be it jobs or benefits or both. A lot of that market is speculation and even expands with the words of our leaders.... not in actual sales and debits. This was shown when we were seeing 14,000+ numbers... just before the palne hit the ground.
 
We are entering into another Holiday season and the retailers are unsure about their hopeful sales sans "Black Friday". To get people to shop, even Walmart is throwing out the stops with $10 toys.... that is the bait..... We will see the state of the economy maybe after we are done chasing, swearing, and buying in January.
 
Yes I am a Curmudgeon, but if there is one thing I have learned ..Life is not fair and you should never "look good" laying in that coffin. You should looked rode hard, put away wet and used up. No one looks good after their last breath.
 
I do laugh though, when I hear that us elders cannot buy our meds and food too but I see alot of blue hairs and hairless loaded into our local eating establishments and I see the younger, under employeed or unemployeed belly up to a bar... A confusing scene to say the least. Perception vs Reality


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 17, 2009, 08:15:34 AM
I'm actually an optimist by my nature (though I wasn't lawys) - but when it comes to anything 'Washington' I am not an optimist. I'm a fan of less government - with a very limited scope. The larger it gets, the less efficient it is . . . the harder it is to regulate. (Whixh is f*cking hilarious by the way in that it's interested in regulating everyone else, but no-one really has the power to regulate IT save for voters. But when we say something, we're mocked and marginalized by government and the media.)

“Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.” - Thomas Jefferson


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 17, 2009, 08:48:55 AM
ROTFLMAO.... VOTE!!!! You can't get 50% of the eligible population to even register. Now... try to get 50% of those to the polls.... then do the math on the ACTUAL percentage of our people who ACTUALLY vote ANYONE into office. Our Voting Percentage is totally PATHETIC.
 
Those candidates KNOW how we are and play it that way. This last local election attracted luckily 17% of the over all eligible voters. That means that if you could garner 9% of the eligible voters, you were in. LOL and we complain when Politicians "don't listen to us"  :D  ....
 
 
 
I'm actually an optimist by my nature (though I wasn't lawys) - but when it comes to anything 'Washington' I am not an optimist. I'm a fan of less government - with a very limited scope. The larger it gets, the less efficient it is . . . the harder it is to regulate. (Whixh is f*cking hilarious by the way in that it's interested in regulating everyone else, but no-one really has the power to regulate IT save for voters. But when we say something, we're mocked and marginalized by government and the media.)

“Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.” - Thomas Jefferson


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 17, 2009, 08:53:36 AM
Lifetime -

Nailed it. Sad but true.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on November 17, 2009, 01:08:14 PM
positive thinking is a good trait, postive feeling is another animal altogether. the two are vastly different. reality is the crux of the matter. you can think and feel a lot of things, if they dont correspond with reality you could end up making a lot of bad decsions. or make bad decsions for others in your care or under your state control.... 

forcing feelings to correspond with a forced ideal of reality (that is neither ideal or real) is... denial. the more i study the more i think liberal ideology is based on this type of thinking/feeling.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 17, 2009, 08:57:32 PM
When 500,000 more lose their jobs and it is less than normal and we think that is a positive..
 

I actually do. Last November people were losing their jobs to the tune of 800,000 a month, so 175,000 a month is better by my math. Then, the news was all negative, with no reasonable idea how bad things would get, or how long it would last. Would the financial industry collapse?
Today thing are way better. The outlook is optomistic, not grim.
Are people suffering? Of course. No matter what the economy, there are always those that suffer. Recessions cause more to suffer. Recovery, no matter how slow, lessens that suffering.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 17, 2009, 09:30:41 PM
positive thinking is a good trait, postive feeling is another animal altogether. the two are vastly different. reality is the crux of the matter. 

BH, that would in my thinking describe most of we small business owners.
But I don't see them as disparate traits. Most of the successful one's I know are positive, foward looking people. Most have a very good grasp of objective reality as it applies to their efforts, and maybe most importantly ,almost all have confidence that they can effectivly deal with any problem or challenge.
Note, this does not apply to politicians. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 18, 2009, 07:41:09 AM
Sorry.... this is...to me watching people dying that a year ago were alive and they are still dying at a slower rate.... BUT still they die and families die with them... Hmmmm Do I want Terminal cancer with a 6 month prognosis or do I step out in heavy traffic.... Or... Hmmmm Choices Bubonic Plague or Eboli... which one is BETTER???
 
 
When 500,000 more lose their jobs and it is less than normal and we think that is a positive..
 

I actually do. Last November people were losing their jobs to the tune of 800,000 a month, so 175,000 a month is better by my math. Then, the news was all negative, with no reasonable idea how bad things would get, or how long it would last. Would the financial industry collapse?
Today thing are way better. The outlook is optomistic, not grim.
Are people suffering? Of course. No matter what the economy, there are always those that suffer. Recessions cause more to suffer. Recovery, no matter how slow, lessens that suffering.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 18, 2009, 12:10:40 PM
Lifetime: The outlook for your particular region of the US IS grim. There are fundamental problems in the economy there that haven't been addressed for decades.
 
I totally agree that you need to act on a local level to change things, but obviously people there seem to like their representation.
 
I agree with Puffin that you have to have a positive outlook with realistic expectations: Change what you can and encourage who you can. My experience in Crawford and Erie counties was one of dog eat dog, so that may play a part in your grim outlook.
 
I lived there through the 70's when you couldn't even get a job at McDonalds (2.35 an hour even!), at least where I am, you can cobble together 2 or 3 jobs to get by.
 
I tell my relatives in Michigan all the time: The past is gone. If you can't find a job, move where the jobs are. They still need a ton of construction help on the gulf coast (Texas, MS, ALA) and there are a lot of places in this world that are hiring...
 
Maybe just not Meadville/Western PA.
 
And that is a problem that needs to be discussed, not who's king of the hill in washington or harrisburg. People in your area should, like you, be active locally instead of being glued to fox news or cnn.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 18, 2009, 01:00:10 PM
I will admit to you, I am a news junkie...be it national or local. I am retired so I do have steady income.... so far. I stay because... I was born and raised here and so far have lived below my means. I don't do without, just not all the bells and whistles. Yes, you are right.... things are bad here..
 
Economically, as a nation we have become the "junkie" of the world.... we will buy ANYTHING at a lower price and that at the cost of jobs we use to have. We have less large manufactuing here than we use to.
 
Locally, we couldn't attract flies if we were week old dung..... tax base is too prohibitive to attract all but small shops and Pizza Businesses. We are now putting all our eggs in ONE basket so to speak with the Health Businesses and Penn State. The rest is to serve those who are employeed by those two entities.
 
A large part of our actual citizens are there with a hand out once a month and food stamps in their pocket. Retirees and those still able to get our rears in gear for work, are expected to ramp up the Tax System within the cities and county. When we go to our final reward...so will this county and cities. No one else left to actually pay the electric bill so to speak.
 
We have entirely TOO many people on public dole and too easy of a system to allow that to happen. My mother started to work here in our valley in the 40's at the Texas Lunch as a waitress and now we have people who are unwilling to sling burgers at McDonalds.... Some seem to prefer selling drugs as long as you can take $1500 and convert it to a pound of Grass without getting your Arse shot at or off. I see a lot of probation that shouldn't be. And I see a lot of absentee landlords who could give a crap less who they rent to as long as PA sends their check to the account in the agreement. When people don't care..... this happens.
 
Now....don't think this will not come to a "Venue near you". See...the "good people" leave and the "bad ones" move in. When the pickings get slim... even they move.... sometimes down the street from YOU. No one is loyal anymore, sans their immediate family and are always looking for that "POT O' GOLD" elsewhere. When you bail, you give up and give in.... The homes either get sold for pennies on the dollar or are abandoned. Stores close, schools deplete, but the need for safety increases and the vicious circle.... less people paying for the Safety Forces and infrastructure and no one to bill but those who were loyal. You may not be facing this where you are YET.... but if the DAM gets TOO full... it will wash your way.
 
A good measure of community is to observe the total function of the schools and the activities within... legal and illegal. Those are the future.... Even those who held their noses up in our county are now seeing activities they have not seen 5 years ago. Either hold the line or let it continue.... by moving... again. then REPEAT until you paint yourself in the proverbial corner.
 
 
Lifetime: The outlook for your particular region of the US IS grim. There are fundamental problems in the economy there that haven't been addressed for decades.
 
I totally agree that you need to act on a local level to change things, but obviously people there seem to like their representation.
 
I agree with Puffin that you have to have a positive outlook with realistic expectations: Change what you can and encourage who you can. My experience in Crawford and Erie counties was one of dog eat dog, so that may play a part in your grim outlook.
 
I lived there through the 70's when you couldn't even get a job at McDonalds (2.35 an hour even!), at least where I am, you can cobble together 2 or 3 jobs to get by.
 
I tell my relatives in Michigan all the time: The past is gone. If you can't find a job, move where the jobs are. They still need a ton of construction help on the gulf coast (Texas, MS, ALA) and there are a lot of places in this world that are hiring...
 
Maybe just not Meadville/Western PA.
 
And that is a problem that needs to be discussed, not who's king of the hill in washington or harrisburg. People in your area should, like you, be active locally instead of being glued to fox news or cnn.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 18, 2009, 03:57:58 PM
You're right, a lot of people don't pull their own weight. I thought you could only be on the dole for 2 years now?
 
btw, I worked at McDonalds 40 hrs a week in HS to support myself to take the pressure off the family.
 
I didn't move to leave what I didn't like, I LOVE the area, especially the outlying areas of Crawford County. I left because there aren't any jobs! I work in the IT industry and can find work in a number of places, just not there.
 
It's different down here, lots of suburbs, we have our share of ghetto but when it starts encroaching on the good neighborhoods they/we fight it back. It's hard to explain but things are 'different' elsewhere. I have lived all over the country and the only place I have found less opportunity (than Western PA) is Detroit. I have relatives there and man, it's sad.
 
MnM doesn't make it any easier by glorifying being poor and in the ghettos of Detroit....
 
I ramble but hey, I'm glad you're doing alright. Just keep fighting the good fight where you're at!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 19, 2009, 08:10:59 AM
The Senate unveiled 'their' version of healthcare . . .

yay.

“Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.” - Thomas Jefferson



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 19, 2009, 11:33:09 AM
I went through the House Version with Veterans in mind... I found some scarey proposals involving Native Americans utilizing the VA and if they are Veterans no problem but what  see.... The HHS will have provisions to bill the VA but the other way around.... not so much
 
Now I quickly went through over 2000 more pages of the Senate proposal.... Veterans..... There seems to be some shady regulations on the Medications prescribed in the VA and Tri-Care with some shady wordings on means to administer the Meds and possibly prosthesis.
 
Personally. I am still trying to figure out why the Veterans Administration was even mentioned in this..... It has a separate Cabinet Position and once a year we take the Independent Budget to Washington and present it to the Joint Committee in order to show what is needed to finance the services/Bricks and Mortar the VA already has. Now we have to worry that another entity will be suckling at the teat that we Veterans have prepared and worked to set in place. To me, in my opinion.... this is just a backdoor grab by HHS to add more money to their Dept. at the cost of cannibalizing the VA. IMHO.
 
This whole thing sucks but I am just one person.
 
 
The Senate unveiled 'their' version of healthcare . . .

yay.

“Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now.” - Thomas Jefferson


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 19, 2009, 11:48:05 AM
I beloieve the VA was mentioned as the government wants to consolidate health care under one giant umbrella (except for government officials of course) to reduce the costs. Weather or not any savings would be realized remains to be seen. The same thing is going on in the financial sector.

I suspect the end result will be "divisions" in the health care system. I chose "divisions" because that's exactly what it's going to be.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 19, 2009, 12:01:28 PM
This is the very reason we do NOT want private hands in this.... The VA Health System is.... no matter what you have heard or read.... one of the BEST Health Systems in our country. This is why the other Health Systems have been trying to aquire it. I have seen the reports on the VA compared to the private/public crap. I don't have the actual reports handy but... I am sure if you address this to the Mercer County VA Director at the Mercer County Courthouse, he will find it easier than I could. The VA is very highly rated. Private sectors what to emulate it and would love to "own" it.
 
The VA System was created for VETERANS ONLY. It was meant to originally take care of those who were harmed while in the mission of serving their country. If the black and white turns gray.... we have veared from that mission.
 
 
I beloieve the VA was mentioned as the government wants to consolidate health care under one giant umbrella (except for government officials of course) to reduce the costs. Weather or not any savings would be realized remains to be seen. The same thing is going on in the financial sector.

I suspect the end result will be "divisions" in the health care system. I chose "divisions" because that's exactly what it's going to be.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 19, 2009, 12:45:19 PM
Lifetime: keep up the good work. A lot of us don't have the time to peruse these documents, and I appreciate your effort. If more of you retired folk had your gumption, we could probably take back washington (or eliminate it to a degree)
 
I'm confused now, I thought the 2 separate bills went through the house AND senate and the last bill was the combination that got voted on. So the HOUSE bill took that long to get passed? Sheesh, what a bunch of idiots.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 19, 2009, 01:58:22 PM
Confused... LOL From the chain of event necessary.... they are .... just now going to vote ..now get this.... to even discuss the Senate Bill. God help us... they need an act of Congress to just FART..  ;D ...
 
There is even a proposed bill to award Purple Hearts to those killed and wounded in Ft Hood and they haven't YET found the guts to call this an act of a Terrorist. WTF???? Don't think this doesn't have those who earned the Purple Heart in a War Zone ... wondering the same.
 
You have no idea what Confusion is until you put 535 people into the mix when ANYTHING needs "discussed". Votes are bought and sold like the express lane at Walmart.
 
They keep you focused on their right hand while the left hand is cleaning you out of money and security. I think this is why they call them CONgress as opposed to PROgress.
 
 
Lifetime: keep up the good work. A lot of us don't have the time to peruse these documents, and I appreciate your effort. If more of you retired folk had your gumption, we could probably take back washington (or eliminate it to a degree)
 
I'm confused now, I thought the 2 separate bills went through the house AND senate and the last bill was the combination that got voted on. So the HOUSE bill took that long to get passed? Sheesh, what a bunch of idiots.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 21, 2009, 09:20:55 AM
http://www.resistnet.com/notes/Top-Line_Facts_and_CBO_Highlights_of_Reid_Bill (http://www.resistnet.com/notes/Top-Line_Facts_and_CBO_Highlights_of_Reid_Bill)
 
A link to a summary of the effects of the Reid version of Healthcare "reform" in the Senate. I tried calling the P aSenators today to express my concerns over the bill - but their voicemails are full. (Both good and bad I guess.) Sending them emails instead.
 
Though that's far less effective.
 
http://casey.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm (http://casey.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm)
 
http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=contact.contactform (http://specter.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=contact.contactform)
 
If you want to do the same.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on November 22, 2009, 10:38:14 PM
LIFE,  This Socialist Democrat party is going to pass the final version of the HC Plan no matter what the majority of the people want.  Their next main thrust most likely, will be processes to establish a  one world government and the loss of an individual's attachment to their country's social systems, religions, values, systems of government, etc.  This is also foretold in the Bible of course.  The current President and his followers are being shown for what they are, but the average person is so dumbed down and readily dupped, that this country deserves what happens to it, to finally wake some of them up.  It's just a shame that we who can see through their real plans have to put up with it, but we chose to be here during these times and we have a place, as Christ's followers and soldiers, to do what we can to thwart them and their diabolical plans as best we can. I'm glad that you are doing your part.  God Bless


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 22, 2009, 11:02:52 PM
R's and D's alike are the problem. When you look at deficit increases and spending as a whole - there's been leaps and bopunds this decade - much of it under complete R control. Not good. It's like they're hellbent on tanking us for some reason . . . though I think the reasons are obvious for those who care to look a little deeper . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 23, 2009, 08:40:07 AM
Quote
This is also foretold in the Bible of course
that's what keeps me calm.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 23, 2009, 08:51:13 AM
Well - this wasn't exactly foretold - but it could be interpreted as such. But - gotta agree with you TiFe - for those who believe in a certain fashion, the end of the story is certain.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 23, 2009, 12:40:10 PM
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,662092,00.html)

Climatologists can't agree on Global Warming.

Yet - we're STILL pushing Cap and Trade. I'm all for the reduction of pollution - because it makes sense. I'm just not for the bogus bullshit reasons they're pushing.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 24, 2009, 08:01:26 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/business/23rates.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1 (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/business/23rates.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1)

Even the New York Times is sayin' somethin's gotta be done about the deficit. what gets me is that the money that was used to keep companies "too big to fail" from failing is essentailly the government's borrowed money. We're using one credit card to pay off another.

The dollar is gonna tank -


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 24, 2009, 09:28:05 AM
I heard on the news some place last night that there are some countries that won't accept the dollar any more....and its happenng more and more. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 24, 2009, 11:42:24 AM
And now there's this!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125902685372961609.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular#articleTabs%3Dcomments (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125902685372961609.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular#articleTabs%3Dcomments)

It seems there's a bit of a conspiracy amongst some in the scientific community who want t osuppress information that might contradict their theories on man made climate change or global warming or whatever.

Nice.

So - who's payin' them? I mean - where do they get their paychecks from? Are they on grants? And who granted the grants? And what do they stand to benefit from said supression?

I swear - this whole NWO thing is like finding one thread to pick at and then it unravels . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 24, 2009, 01:00:19 PM
Well, those who get the grant money and come up with politically favorable views get more grant money. Those who dissent don't get any more grant money. I posted something to this effect quite some time ago where Dr Gray (the hurricane guru) refused to party with the popular notion and had his grant money cut. It's one thing to fight city hall, but fighting capital hill is another.

What do the they stand to lose? Probably nothing. The people that are controlling the grants probably stand to lose a lot if they green technology hits the skids. There's nothing wrong with green tech, but pushing it for ones own benefit is another thing.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on November 24, 2009, 01:32:56 PM
i think they used to call it dishonesty. back in the day when they used to "call it"

(did i just act stupidly?)

i think i qualify for a beer summit, where is my beer summit?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 01, 2009, 01:05:08 PM
You get no beer summit.

Found a great quote today from the comments section from an article in the Wall Street Journal:

"When a Red State voter figures this out in 5 minutes, they are crude, racist, bumpkins with the IQ of a potato. When Ivy League educated, NE liberals take two years to arrive at the same conclusion, they pat themselves on the back for being intellectually deep enough to understand the subtle nuances. And when elitists, often in spite of themselves stumble upon Common Sense, they tend to treat it as a moment of brilliant insight owing to their natural superiority. "

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703499404574558134111577494.html#articleTabs%3Darticle (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703499404574558134111577494.html#articleTabs%3Darticle)

Hmph.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on December 01, 2009, 08:03:51 PM
Quote
they are crude, racist, bumpkins with the IQ of a potato. 

i'm offended, im told mine is at least that of a parsnip...   :P


 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on December 01, 2009, 10:55:19 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34218604/?gt1=43001 (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34218604/?gt1=43001)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on December 02, 2009, 12:18:00 AM
It looks like the Afghan war will become a 2010 election issue.
After 9 months of study and review the details of the plan were revealed. The President made a point that the military was asked for both objectives, a plan and requirements to accomplish that plan. Not accepting the military leaderships input on Iraq got Rumsfeld fired, and resulted in the 2006 election debacle. Lesson learned.
  Th Afghan leadership and warlords have not bought into the concept that it is in their intrest that this war succeed with any real tangible  contributions. The timeline is the only motivation that will work. They need to understand that if the Taliban come back, they will not survive. It's their country and the clock is ticking.
Of particular note was that seated next to Secretary Gates in the front row was General Shinseki. An American hero terribly abused by politicians.
I believe that was no coincidence. I think it will be difficult for the Republicans to offer a counter plan on short notice that ignores the military leadership input once again. There might be some argument on the timeline, but if you dont have a plan, how do you argue timelines.The only argument would be to accept the Presidents statement of " based on conditions on the ground"
For the last 7 years the cost of the war, and the long term care of our military casualties has been kept out of the budget. These costs were hidden in "supplementary funding". Effectivly keeping the taxpayer from knowing what we were spending.
Not anymore!!!! According to the Pres. all those costs (Fannie MAy too) will be in the budget, and the taxpayer will get to see all costs.
This is gonna be a hoot. When the public sees that number, there's gonna be no place the elected official from either party can hide.
They are going to have to cut spending.
Some may have noted that late today the newsies reported some Democrat reps mentioned a War Tax. Shortly thereafter Pelosi was asked about it and remarked that it was not likely.
I think the Dems are jerkin the Reps gherkin already. 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on December 02, 2009, 07:48:30 AM
Hmmmm Now David Obey ( D-Wisc.) is proposing a War Tax of sorts. That will go over well.
 
Personally..... I see this Troop plan having a few flaws.
 
1) This has been going on for how many years? And now we had to waste 4 months to PLAN? This should have been ongoing. Like chess, you have to have a sense of lead time.
 
2) An EXPERT was asked what he needed. It was scrutinized day one. Now 4 months later.. a smaller number is committed and planned by personnel who weren't and are NOT on the ground in the dirt. One thing I learned... when you ask a commander who is physically under fire in a battle..." what do you need???" Give it to him!! He is trying to save some asses and your indecision doesn't help. If TANKS were sent to the American Commanders/Soldiers in Mogadishu, Somolia 1993 ... maybe this would not have been the outcome.
 
http://www.paulnwhelan.com/documents/MogadishuReport.pdf (http://www.paulnwhelan.com/documents/MogadishuReport.pdf)
 
Many years later, I had the honor of meeting and talking with Michael Durant..captured American pilot depicted in "Blackhawk Down". In my time with him, he basically said that we did what we did with what was given to us. The rest is history. In my time with him, I took my POW-MIA Bracelet off ( It was marked with Mercer County's only POW-MIA from the Vietnam War... Capt. Maurice Edwin Garrett) and gave it to him to wear. He put it on.
 
I have seen the results of Politicians being in charge of Military situations... Personally in Vietnam, shared with Durant and now with a present footdrag. So far...2 out of 2 were not good and now ...a third. Time will tell.
 
The real problem with this delay.... it will take months if not most of the next year to get the troops in and on mission. Afghanistan is not Iraq. There are no real roads or airports of significance. Moving soldiers is just part of the problem.... there are many more things involved... LOGISTICS of SUPPLY.... equipment, food, medical equipment, ammo... all painfully slowed by lack of infrastructure to supply that number of American Soldiers.
 
3) If there is one thing Dweebs needed to learn from Vietnam and the end game... Never tip your hand with indications of an end date. You offer no reason for Afghans to have any faith in your mission, if you don't. As you scurry out that last door...there are less of you and you can be, and usually are, a better target. Ask the family of the Last Marine Killed on the roof of the US Embassy in Saigon. No date is needed, just say it will end when the mission is over. Now I begin to wonder what the mission is? ? ? I am hoping the Afghans will be able to defend their country and after this.... have the desire, knowing that we are planning to "cut down the tamarind tree". ( refer to the tamarind tree that was in the courtyard of the American Embassy in Siagon. It was cut, just prior to making room for a helicopter to land and remove the very sick Ambassador Graham Martin from the falling embassy.) That tree was long, watched carefully by Americans and Vietnamese alike and marked a dismal end.
 
You all can think of me as you want.... I offer my opinion... I am not asking anyone to believe the same. I can only say what I do by my eyes seeing this.
 
IMHO
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 02, 2009, 09:08:19 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703499404574558300500152682.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular#articleTabs%3Darticle (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703499404574558300500152682.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular#articleTabs%3Darticle)

The Arabs Have Stopped Applauding Obama


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 03, 2009, 08:02:32 AM
I really like this guy . . . .

Ron Paul - Stop Dreaming Remastered (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P2-EPr6rP8#normal)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bluebomber on December 04, 2009, 08:56:42 PM
Wouldn't be nice to raise enough money for an 8:53 add during the Super Bowl, He would probably get elected.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on December 05, 2009, 07:16:00 AM
Well folks... for the most part, this man "scares" me..... I do agree with his IRS/Federal Reserve Stand BUT.... I feel only a fool would believe that our National Security concerns are only at our borders and NOT beyond. The Twin Towers did not get hit twice from plans hatched within CONUS. If we wait until it actually crosses our boundaries... we are looking for another "Pearl Harbor" (Anniversary of which is Mon.). If at all possible...I do believe in fighting in someone elses kitchen, not ours. I am not a total Hawk ( I have walked the walk) , but I do believe in "Preventive Maintainance". God bless Ron Paul but some of his ideas do NOT make sense to me. If he is such a Constitutionalist.... he should abolish ALL taxes. Income tax was meant to be temporary and Congressional positions were not meant to be a full time job..... BUT... without the Income Tax.... how do you think the POTUS and his/her henchmen/women get paid???? Hmmmm a job without pay.... How many would run than????? If you are going to go..... GO BIG. Don't pick and choose. Slide the pile into the center of the table and say "CALL".


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on December 05, 2009, 08:53:28 AM
During the campaign of 2008 I listened to what everyone had to say. Ron Paul actually made the most sense to me of any of the candidates. Granted a lot of people call him a whack job because of his radical stance on how he would go about fixing things, however after observing years of band-aids being placed on government programs over the years it may just be time to "build a new one" so to speak. My 2 cents anyhow.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on December 05, 2009, 10:54:58 AM
I think most of the politicians are out of touch with "real" America, no matter how many tours they do across the nation, or how many times they shake a hand.
 
Remember Joe the Plumber? The media put him through so much crap just for asking a question about taxes that we all wanted to know the answer to.
 
Seems Joe has been doing some traveling and learning...
Interesting website about "Joe" here: 
http://www.daylife.com/topic/Joe_the_Plumber (http://www.daylife.com/topic/Joe_the_Plumber)
 
 
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on December 05, 2009, 12:44:11 PM
During the campaign of 2008 I listened to what everyone had to say. Ron Paul actually made the most sense to me of any of the candidates. Granted a lot of people call him a whack job because of his radical stance on how he would go about fixing things, however after observing years of band-aids being placed on government programs over the years it may just be time to "build a new one" so to speak. My 2 cents anyhow.

Radical is what is needed.  Not all of the pussyfooting we see. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 05, 2009, 04:38:53 PM
http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/12/breaking-obamas-safe-schools-czar-is-promoting-porn-in-the-classroom-kevin-jennings-and-the-glsen-reading-list/ (http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/12/breaking-obamas-safe-schools-czar-is-promoting-porn-in-the-classroom-kevin-jennings-and-the-glsen-reading-list/)

Speaking of Radical . . . WARNING - explicit content.

Read through this . . . maked you wonder exactly WTF?! Mr. Obama is thinking . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: bighair80s on December 05, 2009, 07:30:22 PM
Carly Fiorina Delivers Weekly GOP Address (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYW2nAH_jQQ&feature=player_embedded#normal)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on December 09, 2009, 01:38:46 PM
Sometimes I check things and this is what I found...
 
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/haroldestes.asp (http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/haroldestes.asp)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 10, 2009, 02:56:47 PM
Hey! Let's not pay down any debt! Let's raise the amount we're allowed to borrow!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/10/AR2009121002575.html/?hpid=topnews (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/10/AR2009121002575.html/?hpid=topnews)

Sound fiscal thinking!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on December 15, 2009, 07:44:10 AM
Hmmm, it would appear that Club Gitmo is relocating (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/15/AR2009121500095.html?hpid=topnews) to Illinois. This will no doubt aggravate to no end those who thought they would just be released back into the wild.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 15, 2009, 12:28:17 PM
Don't be surprised if they vote in Chicago elections . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 17, 2009, 12:20:00 PM
http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/environment/US-Moves-to-Break-Climate-Talk-Deadlock-79486152.html (http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/environment/US-Moves-to-Break-Climate-Talk-Deadlock-79486152.html)

And how do we propose to raise this $100 billion? They just took 'leftover' TARP monies and created a new stimulus package with it . . . and now this too? I think perhaps taking the 'leftover' $200 Billion and giving it to the Chinese to pay some debts woulda been smart - or better yet, just taken it back outta circulation altogether (because the TARP monies were 'fake' so to speak) to strengthen the dollar a bit woulda been smarter - but . . . I ain't in a position to do such things, and my particular Congresspersons don't really seem to wanna hear about fiscal responsibility these days . . .

*sigh*

TiFe - I gotta take your rainbow and ponies advice. I'm gonna go home early today and play with my little ones and quit thinkin' 'bout this shit for at least a little whiles . . . . 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on December 17, 2009, 12:33:04 PM
Quote
TiFe - I gotta take your rainbow and ponies advice. I'm gonna go home early today and play with my little ones and quit thinkin' 'bout this shit for at least a little whiles . . . . 

 ;D
 
have fun. our parents had to deal with similar issues like what we are dealing with now: I just want shield my kids for now and not be some crusty old complainer.
 
I like the coke commercial where the dude helps everyone and everyone else pitches in and the world is a happier place.
 
In my belief system, we believe if you speak it, it will come. Positive and negative. It seems to be working to my advantage to be a bit peppier so I am going to continue to be a positive force even in the face of despair.
 
Y'all enjoy the holidays, I really miss this time of year in W.Pa.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on December 17, 2009, 02:04:55 PM
Hmmm, 2.4 Billion dollars to Israel, a country with a national health care system!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 17, 2009, 02:27:40 PM
Don't make all that much sesne to me. Maybe they spend their money on healthcare that they NEED that money for weapons . . .

Who freakin' knows anymore . . .

rainbows / ponies / rainbows / ponies


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on December 17, 2009, 04:07:37 PM
OK Guys.... I for one, want a powerful ally in that region as just one reason. If you haven't figured it out as yet, the U.S.of A. is one of the BIGGEST arms dealers in the world. Most of what we sell is MADE here by Americans. So let's stop the manufacturing of material by Americans and LAY them off... GREAT!!! Just what we need. Now read this... if you please...
 
 
1. Israel
$2.4 billion
Virtually all of this money is used to buy weapons (up to 75% made in the U.S.). Beginning in 2009, the U.S. plans to give $30 billion over 10 years.
 
That is money COMING BACK to us. If there is one thing I have learned about us.... WE ARE NOT A PEACEFUL PEOPLE... Never have been and never will be. Our military is buried or missing ALL OVER our globe.
I also give the Israelis credit. They have 7373000 people...less than many of our cities... so maybe Health Care is not a real issue with them. Their standard of living is not that far off from ours. approx $28k/2008 and a bit over 10% under the poverty level. We have 13-17% under the poverty level. We are not that much different.
My hand is up in approval of the money we send to Israel. I do wonder about some others we send money to instead of actual items they need... medical, food, help with infrastructure and education. It isn't hard to see someone in the Sudan who needs shelter, food, medicine and clothing... give them that.
Ok will stop for now   :-X

 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on December 17, 2009, 10:22:04 PM
Hey Lifetime: I totally agree with EVERY point in your last post!  :wahoo:


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on December 23, 2009, 12:44:27 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704304504574610040924143158.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704304504574610040924143158.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular)

A nice article in the WSJ regarding the Healthcare Bill in the Senate. Emotional arguments and anecdotal "support' arguments are being made by the said that wants this done - but the real impact is going to be more centralization of power.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on December 24, 2009, 08:58:42 AM
(http://cdn5.bumperstickersapp.com/bs/big.4617315.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on December 24, 2009, 08:59:52 AM
(http://cdn5.bumperstickersapp.com/bs/big.4617355.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on January 13, 2010, 02:55:17 PM
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/01/barack-obama-council-of-governors.html (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/01/barack-obama-council-of-governors.html)

A Council of Governors now?

WTF?

I love the comments section . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on January 13, 2010, 10:26:26 PM
so if there is a problem with the Nat'l security apparatus not communicating effectively,  ??? what is the condition of the state's organizations
 
http://www.pema.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/homeland_security/14251 (http://www.pema.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/homeland_security/14251)
 
YTDAW or are they not working. Better ask the Gov. ;D
(http://www.most-wanted-western-movies.com/image-files/blazing-saddles_3.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on January 14, 2010, 07:03:06 AM
Look.... OFFICE of HOMELAND SECURITY.... my big hairy.....A$$. This was a "GIFT" folks...spell it now..... G-I-F-T to Tom "Rocky" Ridge. It was invented to keep him out of wanting a position, at the time, as POTUS/VPOTUS...nothing more. In it's initial stage, it was to cost the taxpayers NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS... LOL Check the bill now. Then it had a mission..... to get the ALPHABET orgs... like FBI,CIA,NSA,ASA,CIS of all military, Embassies and GOD..have we now ...from an executive order, have to include INTERPOL as well, to cooperate and share info. Well folks..it didn't happen and.... IT WON'T We saw this with the "Undy Bomber". These investigative segments WILL NOT give up any chance to toot their own horn. We can't even get the Bureau of Unemployment and the Department of Public Welfare to share info on clients.
 
This Cabinet entity should be abolished and the job given back to those who had it in the first place.... Same results ...either way, so, save the Freaking money. Homeland Security has always been those willing to don the uniform of lawenforcement and yes.... National Guard. We have them, use them. Yes, I understand Posse Comitatus and know that Law Enforcement is the one who can arrest and detain.... but the National Guard was used in places like KENT STATE and even the G-20 in the Burgh..IN CONJUNCTION with the Police entities. They paired up and can be done again. Please, let us quit inventing "positions" for friends in politics. No matter how it progresses, it ends with US/ The Tax Payers... being put in the only position our own Government puts us in... Untrowed, bent over and grabbing our ankles..... without even the benefit of Vaseline. :o


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on January 28, 2010, 10:29:41 PM
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ (http://www.usdebtclock.org/)

This is disturbing. The "spending freeze" being proposed by the President only affects about 4% of the budget. Most of our spending occurs in the areas he said there WOULDN'T be a freeze on. Oh - yeah - and the 'freeze' won't happen till next year . . . by which time the short attention span of the masses will be on something else. (And likely won't be reported on by the American Pravda. (read mainstream media.)

The Oligarchs have an agenda - and the regular schmoes are chattel in their scheme of things. Since the gold standard went by the wayside is when the real slippery slope started.

So - when's the revolution? I don't wanna eat this cake.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on January 29, 2010, 12:05:35 AM
No note was made on this forum of the Supreme court ruling that corporations could now finance elections directly, with no limitations.
Being a Chicago alumni, I am somewhat amused when people rail on about the seemingly unbounded corruption of Chgo politics. Basically it's politics without rules.
We have now moved "politics without rules" to a national level.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on January 29, 2010, 07:12:15 AM
Tell that to Supreme Court Justice Alito  ;) . Though not the same, but some have zeroed in and remain on target... the emotional "YOU LIE!!" comment last year.... there is some rethinking. What we can only hope for is , come Nov....
 
1) Idiots should cut down on straight ticket voting.... ( Even the best sports teams have at least ONE lousy player and he/she WILL be traded off.)
 
2) Idiots should take the time to ACTUALLY study those they vote for.... ( If you don't know who they are... find out before you touch that screen.)
 
3) Idiots...though elected... will begin to realize that about 49% of our population, supports and pays for programs for about 51% of our population. ( Tax Payers are the backbone of our country and economy.... don't break it. )
 
4) Idiots, should again, read, understand and follow one of the most basic documents we have.... the Constitution and follow it's guidance. ( We have a majority of 535 people who don't seem to have done that. Have you?)
 
5) Idiots who chase the "fast dime" instead of a "slow nickel" will understand when they loose everything, it isn't everyone elses fault for their stupid decisions and ... (Billionaires now reside in jail )
 
6) finally... Idiots have to begin to realize at least this truth..... "LIFE IS NOT GOING TO ALWAYS BE FAIR!" It is lived. ( Go back and read your Constitution when you start thinking you have RIGHTS that aren't in there!)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on January 29, 2010, 07:44:05 AM
It's sort of and odd situation with election financing. If you're wealthy you can get elected. But if you're not and can get corporate financing then you can get elected. However you will get "owned" so-to-speak. However the wealthy get financed by special interest groups and get "owned" by them. It's a vicious circle ain't it?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on January 29, 2010, 07:57:21 AM
And the conduit is through the money parties.

That's why i found the Jesse Ventura phenomenon interesting. though he couldn't get too much done because he had to deal with a money party legislature.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on January 29, 2010, 08:36:26 AM
http://www.toledofreepress.com/2010/01/29/the-state-of-president-obama%E2%80%99s-key-failures/ (http://www.toledofreepress.com/2010/01/29/the-state-of-president-obama%E2%80%99s-key-failures/)

I think this sums up the SOTU Address the other night.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 01, 2010, 07:32:50 AM
This (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6101XF20100201) I am not happy about!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on February 01, 2010, 11:16:48 AM
This makes my blood boil! I have not had a chance to check the veracity of this but this would not surprise me in the least.
 
 
Stimuls money at work----I love it JOBS JOBS----
Total Personal Staff members for other first ladies paid by taxpayers:
 
Mamie Eisenhower: One-- paid for personally out of President's salary.Jackie Kennedy:         OneRoseline Carter:         OneBarbara Bush:            One
Hilary Clinton:          ThreeLaura Bush:              OneMichele Obama:         Twenty-two
 
How things have changed!  If you're one of the tens of millions of Americans facing certain destitution, earning less than subsistence wages stocking the shelves at Wal-Mart or serving up McDonald cheeseburgers, prepare to scream and then come to realize that the benefit package for these servants of Ms. Michelle are the same as members of the national security and defense departments and the bill for these assorted lackeys is paid by YOU,
John Q.Public.Michele Obama's personal staff:One..      $172,200 - Sher, Susan (Chief Of Staff)Two..      $140,000 - Frye, Jocelyn C. (Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of                                 Policy And Projects For The First Lady)Three..    $113,000 - Rogers, Desiree G. (Special Assistant to the President and White House                                 Social Secretary for Mrs. Obama)Four..      $102,000 - Johnston, Camille Y. (Special Assistant to the President and Director of Communications                                 for the First Lady)Five..      $100,000 - Winter, Melissa (Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First
                                 Lady)Six..          $90,000  - Medina , David S. (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)Seven..      $84,000 - Lilyveld, Catherine M. (Director and Press Secretary to the First Lady)Eight..      $75,000 - Starkey, Frances M. (Director of Scheduling and Advance for the First Lady)Nine..       $70,000 - Sanders, Trooper (Deputy Director of Policy and Project for the First Lady)Ten..        $65,000 - Burnough, Erinn (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)Eleven..    $64,000 - Reinstein, Joseph B.(Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
 
Twelve..    $62,000 - Goodman,  Jennifer R. (Deputy Director of Scheduling and Events Coordinator For The First
                                  Lady)Thirteen..  $60,000  Fitz, Alan O.(Deputy Director of Advance and Trip Director for the First Lady)Fourteen..  $57,500 - Lewis, Dana M. (Special Assistant and Personal Aide to the First Lady)Fifteen...    $52,500 - Mustaphi, Semonti M.. (Associate Director and Deputy Press Secretary To The First Lady)
Sixteen..    $50,000 - Jarvis, Kristen E. (Special Assistant for Scheduling and Traveling Aide To The First Lady)Seventeen..  $45,000 - Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (Associate Director of Correspondence For The First Lady)Eighteen..  $43,000 - Tubman, Samanth a (Deputy Associate Director, Social Office)Nineteen..  $40,000 - Boswell, Joseph J. (Executive Assistant to the Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)Twenty..    $36,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (Staff Assistant to the Social Secretary)Twenty-One.. $35,000 - Bookey, Natalie (Staff Assistant)Twenty-Two.. $35,000 - Jackson, Deilia A. (Deputy Associate Director of  Correspondence for the First Lady)Total..    $1,591,200 in annual salariesThere has NEVER been anyone in the White House at any time who has created such an army of staffers whose sole duties are the facilitation of the First Lady's social life.One wonders why she needs so much help, at taxpayer expense.Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboard Air Force One to Europe .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 01, 2010, 11:40:34 AM
Here's the snopes link (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/firstlady.asp). Evidently it's true. Why she would need 22 people on staff is beyond me.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on February 01, 2010, 12:10:13 PM
Here's the snopes link ([url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/firstlady.asp[/url]). Evidently it's true. Why she would need 22 people on staff is beyond me.

 
No doubt to buttress her hubbie's claims of "job creation".


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 01, 2010, 12:39:02 PM
Interesting to note that 17 of the 22 have management titles. If this were a private company it would be deemed top-heavy.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on February 01, 2010, 12:44:35 PM
I do not believe that the Obamas have much knowledge of private sector business practices therefore the point would be wasted on them.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 01, 2010, 12:48:32 PM
Even in government there has to be fewer administrators.  I just read what I wrote so never mind...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 01, 2010, 01:03:09 PM
Did you read about the budget proposal for this year? For all the railing againstBush and budget spending - this guy has no shame.

Cripes.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on February 01, 2010, 01:50:42 PM
The real "gem" is the extra spending on "education". Now that his other constituencies are paid off (UAW=GM and Chrysler bailout; Government unions= enlarging government and raising their funding by double digits last year), he has to pay off the teachers union. From what lowly old me has seen, throwing money at schools has not been shown to improve education in the least.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 01, 2010, 02:14:55 PM
There was an interesting story on a TV news-magazine some time ago that basically determined that the quality of the school facilities had nothing to do with the quality of education. They concluded that the quality of education all came down to the teachers and the parents of the students, with the students cooperation of course. Teachers in the K-12 public system seem to have almost no latitude in teaching because of political concerns and the imposed ideologies of the administrators it's a wonder kids learn anything. I don't know how the teachers unions are, but most that I have encountered are only there to ensure their own continuation, not those who they supposedly represent.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 01, 2010, 04:20:36 PM
Unions never got me anything but hungry as a kid and don't do anything forme now except take a portion of my paycheck and "negotiate" for me every few years at contract time.

I am VERY angry about unions right now - and have a little plan in place to try and do a little something to "give back" to them. (Extreme sarcasm intended.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 01, 2010, 05:49:21 PM
(http://www.glennbeck.com/images/news/2010/01/012910pod1.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 01, 2010, 06:35:28 PM
http://terpconnect.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf (http://terpconnect.umd.edu/~hannahk/bulletin.pdf)

Study funded by government dollars stating that conservatism is essentially a form of mental illness. That's really really funny - until you play it out . . . cuz a lot of political dissidents have been categorized as such - and you know, if research exists to back that up . . .

Good thing I'm a Libertarian. Ain't really conservative - ain't really liberal. Maybe I'm healthy!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on February 01, 2010, 10:36:10 PM
Teachers in the K-12 public system seem to have almost no latitude in teaching because of political concerns and the imposed ideologies of the administrators it's a wonder kids learn anything.

The problem is if you get rid of the unions, and their assumed control over education, what replaces them?
Politicians! Maybe your better off with the unions. Pick your poison.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 02, 2010, 07:09:49 AM
Hmmm, why not let the teachers educate them?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 02, 2010, 07:47:31 AM
Interesting post Gore -

Begs the question - are tax dollars better given to a large centralized entity a thousand miles away where you might get back more than, a portion of,  or none of what you sent them, or is it better to keep it local in the first place?

I know what the Constitution and the Federalist papers say . . . too bad said entity a thousand miles away doesn't.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 02, 2010, 08:16:47 AM
People send money a thousand or more miles away hoping for a return on their investment all the time... In Las Vegas. I wonder what the house odds are in Washington DC?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 02, 2010, 08:49:37 AM
I guess they're better if you have a dealer like Murtha as opposed to one like Dahlkemper.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on February 02, 2010, 08:37:52 PM
I'm becomin more and more scared of the spendin......I have always been aware but it's startin to really scare me in recent months.....I don't think this is the the Obamanites were hopin for when they voted......


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on February 03, 2010, 12:36:31 AM
Did you know the 541 members of Congress employ 23,000 staff members. The boss is only in town for less than 100 days a year. Good work if you can get it!

http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly35.asp (http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly35.asp)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on February 03, 2010, 07:38:53 AM
Law is for King and Pauper alike.....
 
I am not condoning all the "employees" of the Legislators...
 
Here is what I see.... Most of the "employees" are INTERNS. These are school/College kids who want this type of assignment. I know a young lady who has routed AGAINST the Government but because she is a Political Science Major in the DC area and wanted to intern to get in the "game". Another item about this..... In the "acquiring" of this position.... I don't think the "minimum wage" law applies. This follows much like the SMOKING BAN in Government buildings.... When I walked the halls on the Hill in the past,  I noticed ashtrays in the halls and offices... Hmmmmm I know..must be for used chewing gum  ;) .
 
I am also in agreement.... these Legislators CAN do without alot of these staff members. I don't think the origial intent was to have a crew at their beck and call.... and for that matter, the job of Legislator was not intended to be much more than temporary at best. We ALL have lost the original intent. Time to go back to basics.
 
In the beginning, I think the House of Representatives was the only and original house.... elected by the people. Then there was a worry of Mob Rule Power for the Larger States so the House of Representatives PICKED 2 Senators for each State to level the field. Later.... the Senate was elected... By the people.
 
 
Did you know the 541 members of Congress employ 23,000 staff members. The boss is only in town for less than 100 days a year. Good work if you can get it!

[url=http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly35.asp]http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly35.asp ([url]http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly35.asp[/url])[/url]


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 03, 2010, 03:51:11 PM
Here's some food for thought. I heard today that .42 of every American dollar is essentially borrowed money. Think about that.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on February 03, 2010, 05:28:58 PM
So I'm like 40% more broke than I thouht?  Just super.....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on February 03, 2010, 11:16:05 PM
but with 3% inflation your better off today than tomorrow. Spend it now!! ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on February 05, 2010, 03:23:04 PM
This is kind of long but I think it is food for thought. Could he be correct?

 
 
   
     

   
     [size=12pt][/font][/size]
[size=12pt][/font][/size]
[size=12pt][/font][/size]
[size=12pt][/font][/size]
[size=12pt][/font][/size]
[size=12pt][/font][/size]
[size=12pt]  [size=2][size=11pt][/size][/color][/font][/font][/size][/font][/size] [/]
[][/]
[][/][]   I can't believe this is from anyone associated with Harvard.
I hope you find the time to read this with an open mind.[color=rgb(0,32,96)] [/size][/size][/color]
[/i]It's interesting.  Please read it with the open mind rather than immediately breaking it down into left or right, but rather look at it from the neutral viewpoint of right or wrong..  It's like the line below says, "what if he is right?"


Take the three minutes to read this.
Maybe he is wrong.
What if he is right?

 
David Kaiser is a respected historian whose published works have covered a broad range of topics, from European Warfare to American League Baseball. Born in 1947, the son of a diplomat, Kaiser spent his childhood in three capital cities: Washington D.C. , Albany , New York , and Dakar , Senegal .. He attended Harvard University , graduating there in 1969 with a B.A. in history. He then spent several years more at Harvard, gaining a PhD in history, which he obtained in 1976. He served in the Army Reserve from 1970 to 1976.

He is a professor in the Strategy and Policy Department of the United States Naval War College. He has previously taught at Carnegie Mellon, Williams College and Harvard University . Kaiser's latest book,
The Road to Dallas, about the Kennedy assassination, was just published by Harvard University Press.

(http://aoladp://MA27891105-0001/Image.jpg)
Dr. David Kaiser


History Unfolding

I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is some thing happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy.. Why?

We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of co llapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and I know precisely what I am talking about) - the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.. It is potentially 1929 x  ten....And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.

And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska .. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important.)

Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?

I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only the beginning..

As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s In those times, the "savior" was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the ave rage German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory. Conservative "losers" read it right now.

And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker.. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did - regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand - the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course. 

How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .... . .. change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

If you think I am exaggerating, look it up. It's all there in the history books.

So read your history books. Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.

Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe. It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in
less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.. All with the best of intentions, of course. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me..

I choose to believe the evidence. No doubt some people will scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe-and why I believe it..

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next elections.

David Kaiser   
Jamestown , Rhode Island
United States   

 
 


 
Pass this along. Perhaps it will help to begin the awakening of America as to where we are headed.......
 
  [/b][/]
[][/]
[] [/]
[][/]
[][/][][/]
[][/]
[][/][][/]
[][/]
[][/][/t][/t][]                                                       [/]


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on February 05, 2010, 11:13:33 PM
there is kind of a noticable trend that when they say "pass it on to your friends", they soon show up in snopes


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on February 06, 2010, 10:55:37 AM
Umm, what was that supposed to be anyway?  I read it and only hear that he is - what - inexperienced? - and some dumb comparison to Hitler? 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on February 06, 2010, 01:12:20 PM
"Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater".  I just thought that some of the things that he raises may be food for thought.  Obama's view for America is not shared by many who still believe in the American Spirit and founding ways.  More people who are going about their daily lives in common ordinary ways and pay little attention to politics, new laws being made, etc., are starting to sense that something doesn't seem right.  Many are tapping into it through intuition, others thoughts, and their own Spirit connection and knowledge.  This is my opinion and the future will reveal the story's ending.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on February 06, 2010, 02:10:38 PM
Quote
We have intentionally dumbed down our schools

Really?  Intentionally?  How so?

Quote
Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?


Remember "No Child Left Behind?"   Not Obama's baby btw.   And trust me, parents ARE, indeed, revoltin.  People are homeschoolin and pullin their kids OUT OF the public school system at an epidemic rate. 

Quote
I just thought that some of the things that he raises may be food for thought.

The only thin I see raised is a comparison to Hitler.  Jeez.  Did I miss somethin?

Quote
Obama's view for America is not shared by many who still believe in the American Spirit and founding ways.

Funny....he WON the election and still has a 50% approval ratin even with all the pissin and moanin I hear.

Quote
This is my opinion

I missed the whole opinion part.  Where was it? 

I did not vote for Obama btw.....your whole copy/paste whatever-it-is just doesn't say anythin is all......except make a hilarious half-ass comparison to someone who killed millions of jewish people.






Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 06, 2010, 07:29:02 PM
There seems to be many of those that go around comparing the POTUS (whoever it is/was) to historical villans.  No doubt this kind of thing will continue as long as free speech and our existing political system is in place. I'm also sure that carnivore's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore_(software)) replacement or some other mechanism (possibly, but doubtfully echelon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency#ECHELON)) has already identified the source of the anonymous poster on Pat Dollard's blog.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on February 07, 2010, 12:39:34 AM
The point in Gore's post was that someone created this article or whatever it is and signed it with the name of a Dr. Kaiser, useing the good doctors credentials to give it credibility. Not only did Dr. Kaiser say he never wrote it, but last Nov. when this article first showed up, it was attributed to a Mr.Woods, who also disclaims it as his work.
Hmmm. Clearly a fake,but some would agree with it if it was real.
 
Thats a yuk right there ;D  The Public School System is to blame without a doubt.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 07, 2010, 08:55:33 AM
I get emails like that all the time from my Dad. I don't put too much stock in them. I mean - being a Libertarian and all - I can agree with some of what's being said - but why attribute it to someone when you KNOW there's stuff like snopes out there. Why not just write that this is your own opinion and send it to friend and send it on?

Maybe there's a secret cadre of email originators . . . all part of the Illuminati I'd imagine. (I hear a lot about them from some of my more colorful  friends on FB.)



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on February 08, 2010, 12:46:47 AM
Damifino Life.
 
I think if there was a forum poll taken it would be unanamous that politics and the political industry are the most corrupt and corrupting institution in our daily lives.
Nor would any one here post something about another forum member they knew was untrue, for any reason, or pass on questionable info without checking for authenticity.
Yet where politics is concerned  there are no such qualms. Morality becomes flexible for the sake of personal political goals. (9th-10th commandments). More importantly to sacrifice personal integrity and honesty for such corrupt goals is sensless.
Makes you wonder what that does to the kids.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 08, 2010, 05:49:28 AM
Makes you wonder what that does to the kids.

It teaches them.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: E-L Man on February 08, 2010, 09:19:30 AM
Where is Harry Truman when we need him?  ???


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on February 09, 2010, 12:04:13 AM
It teaches them.

what?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 09, 2010, 06:45:49 AM
I think if there was a forum poll taken it would be unanamous that politics and the political industry are the most corrupt and corrupting institution in our daily lives.
Nor would any one here post something about another forum member they knew was untrue, for any reason, or pass on questionable info without checking for authenticity.
Yet where politics is concerned  there are no such qualms. Morality becomes flexible for the sake of personal political goals. (9th-10th commandments). More importantly to sacrifice personal integrity and honesty for such corrupt goals is sensless.
Makes you wonder what that does to the kids.

The people in authority make up they own morality and justify it. It teaches our kids that they do the same. It's okay because those we have elected are supposedly people of integrity. If they lead by example, then the kids will learn from that example. The paradox is that we are supposed to teach them differently, right?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 09, 2010, 07:35:10 AM
You said it NP


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on February 09, 2010, 07:41:21 AM
You're absolutely right NP. When we teach our children what's right and wrong, we generally use examples of people who are wrong and who are right, and to look at the fruit that they have produced in their lives.
 
We have had to go almost to a biblical explanation with them that 'When the Lord comes', you better be on the right side of ther argument.
 
A LOT of the kids in their school are amoral. 'Why can't I do what Johnny does?' at the Kindergarten and First grade level. It's hard to tell a 5 year old that Johnny is going to end up dead or in jail because of his dumb ass behavior, usually because io his parents lack of, well, parenting...
 
And these are the GOOD kids.
 
We are seriously thinking about homeschooling, and I am slowly teaching them that at some point, they are going to be held accountable. Whether it be armaggedon, the tribulation or the'age of enlightenment' (personally like the last one), all your deeds will come to bear.
 
Not Beaver Cleaver by a long shot.
 
...and I don't think Obama is Hitler  :rofl:
 
As much as I disliked Bush, he wasn't either  :no:
 
*off soap box and back on topic *  :smarty:


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on February 09, 2010, 08:15:45 AM
Interesting....
 
http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2009/dec/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2009 (http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2009/dec/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2009)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 09, 2010, 09:53:02 AM
That's quite a list there.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 09, 2010, 12:06:15 PM
I always like to look at the comments section on these lists. Seems a lot of folks are focused on the birth certificate thing. That ain't gonna happen - and if it were an issue, the Presdient would be doing all he could to cover it up, instead he jokes about it at prayer breakfasts. they need to move on.

My issue with all this lay in the fact the R's and D's have written the election rules in such a way that the R's and D's get a 'pass' getting on ballots from a local to a national level. they have mutually created a playing field that favors them.

Personally - I find that type of duplicity (and the accomapnying ignorance /apathy on the part of the electorate) the biggest scandal of all.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on February 09, 2010, 01:08:07 PM
I find the "Birther" thing interesting because if he treats it like a joke and spends the Million plus dollars to bury the "joke"... than I understand his willingness to bury our future citizens in debt in the name of.... "WHAT"? ??? ? SO...he does more than joke about it....
 
How did we get where we are? ??? We have too many people with hands out and no sense of Consequence ...including from the lowly Welfare Recipient to the richest of the rich looking for a new tax dodge. It is the way of our society and as long as people were able to live and get by, no one bitched. Now we smell the burning flesh and BOOM!!!!! It now becomes relevant and damaging.
 
 
I always like to look at the comments section on these lists. Seems a lot of folks are focused on the birth certificate thing. That ain't gonna happen - and if it were an issue, the President would be doing all he could to cover it up, instead he jokes about it at prayer breakfasts. they need to move on.

My issue with all this lay in the fact the R's and D's have written the election rules in such a way that the R's and D's get a 'pass' getting on ballots from a local to a national level. they have mutually created a playing field that favors them.

Personally - I find that type of duplicity (and the accompanying ignorance /apathy on the part of the electorate) the biggest scandal of all.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on February 09, 2010, 11:20:23 PM
That's quite a list there.

1 Republican! I think I'm having an attack of the vapors. Honesty and integrity at last. Hitler didn't even make this list.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on February 09, 2010, 11:51:09 PM
Think of the list this way... it only posted the top 10.... it didn't have room for ALL of the others in our Government   ;)
 
 
That's quite a list there.

1 Republican! I think I'm having an attack of the vapors. Honesty and integrity at last. Hitler didn't even make this list.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 14, 2010, 04:37:58 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/series/all-the-presidents-emails (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/series/all-the-presidents-emails)

Interesting. A record of (some of) President Obama's emails and communications.

Mmmmm. upon further review - probably satire - but funny.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on February 16, 2010, 09:47:39 PM
Andrew P. Napolitano is a 59 year old former New Jersey Superior Court Judge.  He is a graduate of  Princeton University , and Notre Dame  Law  School .  At Princeton he was a founding member of the Concerned Alumni of Princeton along with Justice Samuel Alito.
 
Judge Napolitano is the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of the State of  New Jersey .
 
Click below and listen to Judge Napolitano's important message to all Americans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=7n2m-X7OIuY


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on February 17, 2010, 07:48:13 AM
Excellent Zip! Thank you!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 17, 2010, 01:40:35 PM
Given the cost of the snowstorms shutting down Washington I wonder if there's any money earmarked for snow removal equipment in DC? Some senator with a heavy equipment company in his back pocket ought to be jumping on this one!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on February 17, 2010, 05:35:20 PM
Actually now that I think of about it... at least 100 of the 535 jackals should be hounding the local DC government for the purchase of equipment from their friends.. errr... constituents I mean and promising them some kind of reinvestment monies. High speed snow plows maybe?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 03, 2010, 07:48:11 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704548604575097493017190752.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704548604575097493017190752.html)

The more I read in the WSJ - the more I like the WSJ. Healthcare boiled down a bit.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 03, 2010, 12:02:55 PM
Not part of the Obama Administration -

Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) temporarily steps down from Chairmans seat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzPyJaD0USQ&feature=player_embedded#normal)

But he is one hypocritical tool ain't he?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 03, 2010, 12:34:28 PM
How much you wanna bet Nancy P claims she was instrumental in getting this to happen since she once stated she would "drain the swamp" of all the unethical practitioners in congress.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 03, 2010, 06:13:26 PM
Pelosi is an idiot.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/33595.html (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/33595.html)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 03, 2010, 09:30:14 PM
Pelosi is an idiot.
l[/url]

Jeez, get off the fence already!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 05, 2010, 09:19:31 AM
http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/02/28/the-road-to-dictatorship/ (http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2010/02/28/the-road-to-dictatorship/)

This is an interesting article. Not sure of the 'stripe' of the author- which is what makes it interesting. It's an appraisal of the erosion of our liberties as a society.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 06, 2010, 09:31:28 AM
Hmph! Al Jazeera has something decent to say about the Bush Administration!

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/iraqelection2010/2010/03/201035195518278382.html (http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/iraqelection2010/2010/03/201035195518278382.html)

And a bit of criticism for the current one.

Seems odd - but I'm glad that the investment of lives made in Iraq are proving to be somewhat fruitful.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 06, 2010, 11:41:20 AM
That's a very interesting perspective especially considering the source. I was never a big fan of GWB. He like those that came before him did what they though was best. He probably got beat up for it more, but he stood his ground. Of course as they say... the proof is in the pudding. In 20 maybe 30 years or so we'll all be able to see if it was worth it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 08, 2010, 08:41:31 AM
As a side note to all this: I hope we never get the amount of government we pay for.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 11, 2010, 04:19:00 PM
Honestly - I have to wonder if they're not just doing this sh!t on purpose.
 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/11/bidens-middle-east-tour-plagued-snubs-mishaps/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/11/bidens-middle-east-tour-plagued-snubs-mishaps/)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 11, 2010, 06:59:19 PM
Thought perhaps you might be interested in seeing this. I receive information from Organizing for America (because I like to keep an eye on those whom I disagree with) and this came in my e-mail inbox today.

Dear (lifefeedsonlife),

President Obama has called for the House to vote to move health reform forward as soon as early as next week. Your representative, Rep. Kathleen Dahlkemper, voted for reform last fall, and is a critical ally in our fight. But with insurance company lobbyists pulling out all the stops to block reform and smear its champions, we must speak up right away.Please call Rep. Dahlkemper today to say "thank you" -- and to report that OFA supporters in Pennsylvania have pledged 332,199 volunteer hours to back up members of Congress like yours who stand up for health reform.

My eyebrow raised a bit at this last paragraph. I mean - what exactly does "back up" mean? Does it mean volunteer for her next campaign? Does such a promise of volunteer hours equate to a type of bribe?

I find it fishy - and thought I ought to forward this on to you.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on March 11, 2010, 07:52:10 PM
Dahlkemper LOL  :D ... From my dealings with her on several issues and legislation that is important to maybe 60K+ of her constiuents, I have found her to be unable to find her ARSE in broad daylight with written instructions, a flashlight and a crowd to cheer her on. She doesn't follow up on a damned thing and her backing this Health Bill ...even when she has no idea what is in it and it being rewritten as we speak, has to scare you. I went through both the original House and the Senate bill... I found sections of it that could rape the Veterans Administration of funding as well as dictate the medicines and means of medical administration of such, as well as items needed in the treatment of our Veterans. I had emailed, snailmailed, phoned and faxed and to add another level...have personally handed this info to her and even her House Mice. Not one reply or reaction in 3 months. I am now slated to have a meeting with her in Erie at ther end of the month. It is a quarterly meeting. I pressed the issue 6 months ago that her office has a big problem.... COMMUNICATION..well guess what I am going to bring up .... DUH. Again.
 
If anyone believes in her as much as she and her BOSS does...God help us.... I know a door in my home that listens better. Hmmmm maybe I should try the cats.
 
And no.... I am not beating on her because I am GOP.... I have more respect for Altmire than I did Hart once I watched his voting record. I think Mark Longietti is the best State Rep that his district has had in decades and I work well with him on legislation as well as seeing him at numerous funtions he is part of. I never voted straight ticket in my life and no...I didn't vote for McCain and he is an EX POW.... but Obama didn't get my vote either.
 
So... we shall see... if indeed she gets the "volunteers" as well as if she will have a second term come November. IMHO
 
Oh and Ko-Shin (aka Hermitage) if your out there  ....  ;) I don't think she ( Dahlkemper ) can butter her own butt  ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 12, 2010, 10:35:00 AM
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGFhMzk4N2UzYmQyZGQ3Mzk1NzFhOTQwMjk2ZTgwNDk= (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGFhMzk4N2UzYmQyZGQ3Mzk1NzFhOTQwMjk2ZTgwNDk=)

The Slaughter Solution is unconstitutional. If this happens - there's a BIG BIG BIG problem with how Congress is going about its business (and with the way the Administration is interacting with it.) 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on March 12, 2010, 11:21:24 PM
Lots of emotion on the net over the 911 payout to those not covered by previous payouts.
They were once hero's.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 14, 2010, 09:44:03 AM
Harry Reid is an idiot.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 14, 2010, 10:25:10 AM
Wow! You think higher of him than I do Life.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 14, 2010, 10:26:03 AM
Dear Senator Casey, Senator Specter and Congresswoman Dahlkemper,

I have written you numerous times on the subject of the governmental overhaul of healthcare. Please DO NOT vote in favor of any revision of this bad idea as it's being presented now. After reading research (from both sides of the legislative argument) I strongly believe this particular brand of "reform" will be bad for the fabric of our society and disastrous in terms of its implementation and budgetary impact.

Also - I'd like to state that the idea of the so-called "Slaughter Solution" is utterly unconstitutional and should be decried by anyone who swore an oath of office to uphold the Constitution.

Please - do not support this.

Please.

Sincerely -


Cut and paste of you wanna use this - or comment away if ya don't!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on March 14, 2010, 04:30:38 PM
Many mouths will make the noise that 6 ears will ignore..... Piss on letters as the only means of contact...... Call their office and note the time/date and the House Mouse you talked to and note what was said. When they all come to a "Town Meeting" near you..... use your notes and NAME the HOUSE MOUSE. I know this works on Specter because my partner and I did this and embarassed the hell out of Arlen to the point, he had anger on his Mouse and signed onto the item we pubically embarassed him with. Leave no corner for them to hide if they feel the need.
 
If they do as you say, By all means, give tham a KUDOS. You have to remember, even a dog reacts to punishment and reward..... politicians do too. I have went out of my way to praise Dahlkemper and when she backslid, it is a segway to "I noticed you back this bill and was wondering WHY you failed or refused to do the same with this one?" In a public venue, this shows all in attendance both sides. ( So make sure you are right and present your case in a manner that the crowd can understand and relay to others.)
 
Politics is a Contact Blood Sport!!!
 
 
Dear Senator Casey, Senator Specter and Congresswoman Dahlkemper,

I have written you numerous times on the subject of the governmental overhaul of healthcare. Please DO NOT vote in favor of any revision of this bad idea as it's being presented now. After reading research (from both sides of the legislative argument) I strongly believe this particular brand of "reform" will be bad for the fabric of our society and disastrous in terms of its implementation and budgetary impact.

Also - I'd like to state that the idea of the so-called "Slaughter Solution" is utterly unconstitutional and should be decried by anyone who swore an oath of office to uphold the Constitution.

Please - do not support this.

Please.

Sincerely -


Cut and paste of you wanna use this - or comment away if ya don't!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 15, 2010, 12:33:25 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/world/asia/16thai.html?src=me (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/world/asia/16thai.html?src=me)

Very interesting.

Thinking in parallels of course - wonder if we'll ever get that intense?



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 15, 2010, 12:42:52 PM
I wish I know how to get ahold of my cousin, he lives there. Will we ever be that intense? I doubt any time soon. The asians tend to be more passionate about their politics.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on March 16, 2010, 12:00:42 AM
Lots of American expats there, ex military. Live cheap and well.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 17, 2010, 07:47:05 AM
Pretty much says it.

Social Security in a Ponzi scheme.

Monkey Beats Social Security (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPbm-0t8hcA#vhq)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 17, 2010, 07:55:52 AM
So we obviously have the wrong monkeys running the SSA then don't we?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 18, 2010, 07:05:29 AM
That was a nice piece of remixing using autotune. Funny too. I'm sure Don McLean (it that the writer?) knows about this by now.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 18, 2010, 07:41:18 AM
Not auto-tuned. That's one of Limbaugh's comedic musical dudes. This bill ain't dead. It's like a cockroach. A zombie f***in' cockroach.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 18, 2010, 07:48:58 AM
That's Limbaugh singing?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 18, 2010, 08:07:41 AM
Nah - some comedian. He does songs that show up on Rush's show regularly. Can't think of his name. I think it's the same dude that did the Barack the Magic Negro song. I don't find him all that funny myself. Don't listen to Rush all that much either.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 18, 2010, 08:20:33 AM
I never listen to Rush or the opposite end either.  Whoever did it sounds like Obama, at least to me. But then I've never heard Obama sing (IF he can sing)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 18, 2010, 08:36:59 AM
http://www.freeskier.com/articles/article.php?article_id=4879 (http://www.freeskier.com/articles/article.php?article_id=4879)

A take on the Obama Fox interview from freeskier. Whatever that is.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: gore range on March 18, 2010, 12:00:20 PM
....I saw this one today-

"You're going to get a health insurance plan written by a committee  whose Chairman has publicly stated that he doesn't understand it,

passed  by a Congress that has literally not read it

but yet has made damn  certain to exempt themselves from it,

to be signed by a president that  also has not read it,

with funding administered by a treasury secretary  who cheated on his income taxes,

all to be overseen by a surgeon  general who is obese,

and financed by a country that is $14 Trillion in  debt to begin with and adding $2 Trillion a year more in red ink per  year BEFORE this bill adds even more red ink to it.

And it will  be delivered to you by a House of "Representatives" that won't even  actually vote on it,

headed by a Speaker who is on record saying that  they'll have to, "pass it to see what's in it."


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 18, 2010, 12:38:28 PM
BOHICA - That's all I got.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 18, 2010, 04:28:54 PM
....and there's no KY.....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 19, 2010, 09:11:20 AM
Well the vote is coming down to the wire. By this time next week out president will either be hero (to his own party anyhow) or will be the earliest lame duck the oval office has ever seen.

That's my opinion for what it's worth.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 19, 2010, 09:58:41 AM
That's actually the chatter around Washington and in Congress. A favorable vote will "save" the Obama Presidency.

Whatever.

Reform is a good idea. This brand of reform (they're voting on the Senate version which includes the caveats to Nebraske and Louisiana) SUCKS. If it was so f***ing great - why would those bribes need to be in there in the first place?

From what I understand - there's gonna be a lot of folks marching in Washington this weekend. (One group will be an anti-war protest who might meet up with the anti-healthcare bill folks - which might prove interesting.) I also understand folks from Sharon are being encouraged to gather at Dahlkemper's offices there. I imagine some folks will do the same in Meadville. (I'll head over too I think.)

This is the first domino. If it passes - so will the  government takeover of ALL student loans. (It's in the works - think of the ramifications.) Next will be Cap and Trade. Card check will rear its head again.

I don't think folks are really considering what this means in the long run. taken separately - "Hey, not such a bad thought!" - but when you put it all together . . .

I'm back in the USSA.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 19, 2010, 11:10:42 AM
I guess the KY tax was obfuscated in the bill. So yes, KY will cost more because it is a medical product.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on March 19, 2010, 04:37:06 PM
Here is one to ponder.... I just emailed this to a leader of a large Coalition of Veterans....
 
 
"John,
 
In all of this Chit ( first letter changed for this forum)...did it ever flash that 2 congresses we have gone through and even though we had OVER 50% of Congress Sign onto HRes111 and can't even get the resolution out of Committee but..... the Dems think it is ok to Hijack about 1/6th of our ecomomy on a 51% vote ?????? WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT?????????"
------------------------------------------------------------
HRes111 has to do with forming a House Sub-Committee on Prisoner of War and Missing In Action Affairs. The 110th congress had 280 House Cosigners on it and they wouldn't let it out of committee. Now we have 249 and counting in the 111th. With 435 members of Congress existing...I think we went well ove 50% both Congresses.....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 20, 2010, 10:29:16 AM
Went down to Dahlkemper's Meadville offices at 9am this morning. I know Huber said there was going to be a rally at her offices in Erie this morning. Nothing was happening in Meadville this morning at 9. I took my 6-year-old with me. I wanted her to see Democracy in progress. Apparently - democracy was quiet in Meadville this morning - or my watch is set too early.

We talked about Social Security on the way in. After I explained it - she said it wasn't very fair. So - either she's too naive to understand the adult world - or the adult world we've created is really stupid.

Anyway - we didn't have signs or anything. But she wrote a note before we left. She taped it to Ms. Dahlkemper's door downtown.

It read: "Please don't pass the healthcare bill. I won't be able to pay for it when I grow up." I explained why. She said it was OK to put the sign there. She's a smart cookie.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 20, 2010, 05:09:35 PM
http://docs.house.gov/rules/hr4872/111_hr3590_engrossed.pdf (http://docs.house.gov/rules/hr4872/111_hr3590_engrossed.pdf)

What they're voting on!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 20, 2010, 06:54:18 PM
I wonder if the average person has ANY idea how much information about them would be flowing through government hands if this passes. If it does there going to be a boom in government IT jobs and purchasing. I wonder if they'll do anything at all to revamp the hideously outdated HCFA-1500 and UB-92 forms. So many questions to ask, yet I hope I opportunity won't be there.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 22, 2010, 08:40:18 AM
Individual freedoms vs. the collective well-being.

It's an old struggle - same shit different millenium.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 22, 2010, 09:16:00 AM
Individual freedoms vs. the collective well-being.

It's an old struggle - same shit different millenium.

Sounds like the Borg Mantra


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 22, 2010, 09:44:53 AM
"[Congress] shall make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of society. This has always been deemed one of the strongest bonds by which human policy can connect the rulers and the people together. It creates between them that communion of interests and sympathy of sentiments, of which few governments have furnished examples; but without which EVERY government degenerates into tyranny... If this spirit shall ever be so far debased as to tolerate a law not obligatory on the legislature, as well as on the people, the people will be prepared to tolerate anything but liberty." - James Madison

Congress is exempt from this reform - correct?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on March 22, 2010, 10:11:18 AM
If this fiasco cannot be derailed somehow in the Senate then I will have no recourse but to pursue the path of civil disobedience. We as individuals as well as acting collectively ( no not like the BORG collective) can use a simple concept to exercise our disgust and refusal to participate in this travesty.
 
F.=I.W.
 
Freedom= I Won't
 
I culled this philosophy from another excellent Sci-Fi story "And Then There Were None"
 
http://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php (http://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php)
 
When the government demands that I bow down to its tyranny, I will respond with "I Won't!"
 
When they throw me in prison for my refusal (with susequent loss of my taxation revenue) they will still not have aquired my aquiescence.
 
If enough individuals select an identical pathway, there will not be enough prisons in the USA (or the world for that matter) to hold the masses of like-minded freedom loving American citizens. If a majority or even large minority of the productive members of society are incarcerated then let us see how rapidly this government by tyranny will fall.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 22, 2010, 10:18:31 AM
What makes America unique is that the premise of its construction is based on individual freedoms and NOT the collective well-being of its citizenry. The idea being that individuals will come to the aid of their fellow man of their own volition - not by mandate opf the government.

Here - the idea is - the individual comes first, the whole second. In guaranteeing freedoms for the individual, you are not seeing to their well-being, you are enabling them to see to their own as they best see fit.

So - the question becomes - what do we do with the individual that isn't so good at caring for themselves?

Hmmmm.

We've kinda had this discussion . . . right?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 22, 2010, 11:16:01 AM
It's going to get uglier I'm afraid.  I've been reading this bill....slowly.....there are some nice changes in there that will change the health game for many.   One bitch I am hearing repetatively is they don't like being forced into a plan.  Hmmmm....I am forced to have car insurance.  Just throwing out food for thought.   I suggest reading this thing.  I'm not impressed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 22, 2010, 11:20:18 AM
Well it's a little late for me to reconsider my opportunity to relocate to Australia I had in 1985. The fallout from this may get very ugly on many fronts.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 22, 2010, 11:24:56 AM
'Then what' indeed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on March 22, 2010, 11:25:30 AM
If this fiasco cannot be derailed somehow in the Senate then I will have no recourse but to pursue the path of civil disobedience.
 
 
When the government demands that I bow down to its tyranny, I will respond with "I Won't!"
 
When they throw me in prison for my refusal (with susequent loss of my taxation revenue) they will still not have aquired my aquiescence.
 

 
Hmmmmmmmmmm...Seems that either way...you will need massive amounts of KY... ;D ...

Well the first hoodlum who states "You have a pretty mouth, boy" will end up with a "shiv" in his liver before I become a "receiver". LOL


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 22, 2010, 05:35:06 PM
Ronald Reagan on Socialism & Liberalism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iShCXx_xZDQ#normal)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 22, 2010, 06:17:07 PM
Ronald Reagan - "We the People" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlgTwp93E48#normal)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 22, 2010, 06:28:26 PM
Archie Bunker on Gun Control (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLjNJI54GMM#normal)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 23, 2010, 11:11:42 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/19/opinion/19brooks.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/19/opinion/19brooks.html)

Excellent Op-ed piece in the NYT.

Individualism when equated to selfishness leads to failure.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on March 23, 2010, 12:28:45 PM
[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/19/opinion/19brooks.html]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/19/opinion/19brooks.html ([url]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/19/opinion/19brooks.html[/url])[/url]

Excellent Op-ed piece in the NYT.

Individualism when equated to selfishness leads to failure.

 
 
Interesting Op-Ed. One of the major caveats of more "control" by local government workers is that "Old-Boy" networks spring up as well as nepotism, etc. Sometimes a non-biased non-local can more effectively assess situations and bring fresh viewpoints and have no fear of being ostracized if it is the right choice but anathema to the locals.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 23, 2010, 01:02:45 PM
A good article. The movement to replace our elected officials is definitely gaining traction. There are some good reps out there, but they seem to be small in number. The next six years of elections are going to have some interesting results I think.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 23, 2010, 01:43:30 PM
I joined this group. The screening process rules out lawyers.

Ha!

http://goooh.com/ (http://goooh.com/)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 23, 2010, 02:49:07 PM
Beautiful Life!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 23, 2010, 07:33:14 PM

Joe Biden... available for kids birthday parties too.
http://www.youtube.com/v/D_x2-Eh5oNA




Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 23, 2010, 09:05:36 PM
He mighta had a slight buzz goin'


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on March 23, 2010, 11:56:04 PM
I joined this group. The screening process rules out lawyers.

Now that is an original approach!. Most of those other "grassroots" organizations have co-opted themselves, so an interesting alternative.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 24, 2010, 08:07:05 AM
I watched one of those Jeanie Mose (sp?) pieces on CNN this morning on Biden and his potty mouth.  Hysterical.  I have sometimes wondered why some words are tagged as "filthy" or "bad" words.  They are just words afterall.  This coming from me, who, well, coulda been a sailor.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 24, 2010, 08:07:52 AM
However, unlike Biden, I do know when to put a lid on it!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 24, 2010, 09:08:49 AM
Makes you wonder if - after the lights go down - Obama turns and says "You're a dick."

Biden would be fun to drink with - but drinkers don't always make for good governance.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on March 24, 2010, 11:29:55 AM
lmao


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on March 24, 2010, 12:11:39 PM
And I got banned from a loacal radio station call in program after I said "Money Talks and Bull*hit walks." and I followed that with an apology....This guy gets away with this on NATIONAL (INTERNATIONAL) TV. Like I always say...if foreigners want to kow what America is "really" like...they should watch Jerry Springer.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on March 24, 2010, 08:21:51 PM
"Biden would be fun to drink with - but drinkers don't always make for good governance." - by LIFE 
 
So true LIFE!  Since I am in Delaware a lot at the beach house, I have had to listen to this buffoon for years!  Since it is a DemocRAT state, the people there elected him year after year.  As a second point.  I wish everyone would QUIT calling them the Democratic party!  They are the Democrat party!  They LOVE everyone saying the Democratic party because it also sends a subliminal message to the brain that they are associated with principles of Democracy, which we who don't have blinders on, or drank their "coolaid" knows IS NOT THE TRUTH.  They are a Socialist, Marxist, and downright Communist Party.  Their tactics and policies are right out of the Manifesto!  Their party is so low that if the Devil was real and went to them wanting to run for office, and professed that he WAS the REAL Devil, they would say,"welcome aboard, we can learn from you some ways to past our agenda at any cost!"   :(   >:(


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Janetplanet on March 25, 2010, 09:21:31 AM
I knew there was a reason my inner voice said "don't open that thread - don't go there" and now I know why.  With that I exit.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 25, 2010, 11:25:17 AM
It's OK Janet - we're not trolls.

Just have a point of view.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 25, 2010, 11:28:14 AM
Speaking of the thread subject. I see they're grilling some guy in France for hacking Obama's twitter account.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 25, 2010, 12:15:58 PM
That's actually kind of ironic - given their political bent and all.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on March 25, 2010, 12:24:44 PM
I wonder what his password was anyhow? I'm sure after it got hacked all hell broke loose at some ISP's there.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on March 27, 2010, 08:36:50 AM
If the government steps in and rescues your mortgage - who holds your mortgage - and therefore 'your' property? (Though the Supreme Court ruling eminent domain a few years back - and the concept of property taxes were hinting at the future too - right?)

What's insidious is the benevolence before th tyranny.

On the surface - some folks would most certainly welcome the relief - thill the real storm blows in . . . but, like our (missing) friend BH pointed out a few months back -

Is this REALLY a battle we're in?

Some days - I just sigh and realize that life is life no matter what madmen happen to be in charge. I'll still love my kids and work for what means I can to help them grow and thrive.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 06, 2010, 07:53:03 AM
A thought about taxation from a fellow calling himself Junto Louderback that I've stumbled across:

In a fully free society, taxation - or, to be exact, payment for governmental services—would be voluntary. Since the proper services of a government—the police, the armed forces, the law courts—are demonstrably needed by individual citizens and affect their interests directly, the citizens would (and should) be willing to pay for such services, as they pay for insurance.

The question of how to implement the principle of voluntary government financing—how to determine the best means of applying it in practice—is a very complex one and belongs to the field of the philosophy of law. The task of political philosophy is only to establish the nature of the principle and to demonstrate that it is practicable. The choice of a specific method of implementation is more than premature today—since the principle will be practicable only in a fully free society, a society whose government has been constitutionally reduced to its proper, basic functions.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on April 06, 2010, 08:18:45 AM
a society whose government has been constitutionally reduced to its proper, basic functions.


This is but a dream.  In our lifetime anyway.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 07, 2010, 11:29:39 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303720604575169750237298946.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines#articleTabs%3Darticle (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303720604575169750237298946.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines#articleTabs%3Darticle)

GM loses $4.3B loss in 2009.

From the Comments section:

GM is a healthcare provider that uses autonobiles to fund itself.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on April 07, 2010, 12:43:34 PM
That's funny. I wonder if the UAE workers still get benefits for life like they used to?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 11, 2010, 12:10:02 PM
A little Ayn Rand to ponder:

A businessman’s success depends on his intelligence, his knowledge, his productive ability, his economic judgment—and on the voluntary agreement of all those he deals with: his customers, his suppliers, his employees, his creditors or investors. A bureaucrat’s success depends on his political pull. A businessman cannot force you to buy his product; if he makes a mistake, he suffers the consequences; if he fails, he takes the loss. A bureaucrat forces you to obey his decisions, whether you agree with him or not—and the more advanced the stage of a country’s statism, the wider and more discretionary the powers wielded by a bureaucrat. If he makes a mistake, you suffer the consequences; if he fails, he passes the loss on to you, in the form of heavier taxes.

A businessman cannot force you to work for him or to accept the wages he offers; you are free to seek employment elsewhere and to accept a better offer, if you can find it. (Remember, in this context, that jobs do not exist “in nature,” that they do not grow on trees, that someone has to create the job you need, and that that someone, the businessman, will go out of business if he pays you more than the market permits him to pay you.) A bureaucrat can force you to work for him, when he achieves the totalitarian power he seeks; he can force you to accept any payment he offers—or none, as witness the forced labor camps in the countries of full statism.

The businessman’s tool is values; the bureaucrat’s tool is fear.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on April 15, 2010, 07:09:20 AM
Don't stare at this too long as there may be some residual damage. It kinda makes my skin crawl in more than one way.
(http://i869.photobucket.com/albums/ab254/nightmarepatrol/georgeobama.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 15, 2010, 08:33:14 AM
That's beautiful.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on April 15, 2010, 07:44:36 PM
That is messed up.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 15, 2010, 08:57:00 PM
Obushma!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on April 15, 2010, 09:27:38 PM
It messes with my eyes.  It's like one of those....eye things.....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on April 21, 2010, 09:52:53 PM
I'm surprised that nobody remarked on the fact that GM paid back the TARP loan in full + intrest after only 17 months .
 
Of the $900B paid out all but $200B has been repaid.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: gore range on April 21, 2010, 11:31:17 PM
....isn't that the way loans work?....

....but Big Red is a Ford, just like Lock's  ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 22, 2010, 07:10:31 AM
Yet GM posted a 9.3B loss. So - how was the money paid back?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on April 22, 2010, 07:39:05 AM
Loss my ass.  You can make it look like a loss on paper.  Sales were up how many percent? 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on April 22, 2010, 08:20:37 AM
All the money was paid back, anf GM plans to take back the stock too and get the US out of the auto industry.
 
Toyota is REALLY helping out lately...
 
Sean Hannity is still bitchin' though.   ;D
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 22, 2010, 11:42:00 AM
Hannity's a blowhard. I do hope the stock gets back to where it's supposed to be. Not comfortable with over-officious government involvement in any private enterprise.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on April 22, 2010, 12:34:38 PM
Funny thing is, I used to listen to Hannity and Beck every day for YEARS...as soon as Obama came on the scene though, they really changed the rhetoric and it started getting nasty and paranoid. One day I just turned off the radio because they had NOTHING positive to say, especially after their candidate lost.
 
Did anyone else see the clip where Jon Stewart was responding (with a choir behind him) to Bernie Goldberg? OMG that was the funniest thing I have seen since SNL skits. I can't access YouTube at work but if anyone else can upload the clip, it's hilarious. Even for a conservative  8)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on April 22, 2010, 01:50:10 PM
The stock market is smoke and mirrors. It is propped up by selloffs and quick deals. Quit looking at the 11K+ and just watch the understated Unemployment...steady 9.7% ( actually about 15-18%) and then stroll over to the Interest rates.... CDs and items in that genre are about 1 1/2% and not doing any rising. Interests on loans are climbing. Just this has to tell you that 11K + does not have a solid base. This reminds me of those sweethearts who wrangled the price of oil to over $150 a barrell a while back. The value was FALSELY inflated by the actions of SPECULATORS ... mostly.
 
Home values, while climbing in some areas, do NOT reflect a growing economy but studied.... it is showing that prices are sliding back to values that may be more accurate. So... now get the loan to buy and low interest is not to be found unless you have perfect credit...kinda like the "deal" auto sales have of 0%.... but I have yet to meet anyone who got one... might be my crowd.
 
It is a game of Reality vs. Perception. Don't be fooled... we are still in the crevice and I don't see a rope that can hold any of us. We don't make the money Beck, Hannity Limbaugh, Goldberg, Stewart or Obama makes, so something as simple as a grocery run is an event to us as oppose to a chore for them. I believe in what I have in my hand. The unemployed/underemployed believe in a steady paycheck, the Hungry...a full tummy and the sick...well we have heard the promises. If I am paranoid LOL...then so be it.... I have planned as well as I could so that I...and my wife don't worry where the mortgage money is coming from or my next meal or for that matter... medication and treatment. I live below my means  :o . ... we don't live in a mansion or drive a Benz and when we go out..it may just be a meal with friends or a cone at the local DQ. Cancun, Europe etc.... holds no curiosity for me. I have sun for a tan and enough snow to build a snowman with my Grand Kids.... Measure well...the NEEDS and WANTS.
 
Before Obama took office, those on SS and retirements got a bit of a COLA.... Not so this year and most likely next as well. Ask your parents how that HOPE and CHANGEY thing is spending in their checks. Looks like the bonuses are again.... headed to the CEOS we "BAILED OUT". Do you not see this crap or do you even give a Rats patoot??? It may have been coming all along but so is death and though I know it is coming, I don't want to hurry it. Measure the Plan and Check the Results....
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on April 22, 2010, 02:10:33 PM
Dang, I knew it was all Obama's fault.  ::)
 
There are sectors of the economy that are doing well. My financial advisor once told me something that changed my perception. "You don't have a spending problem, you have an income problem." So I set out to fix that problem because I had cut to the bone and was still sinking.
 
I know I am one of the 'lucky' ones, but I got lucky because of hard work and sacrifice.
 
...and I don't protest for smaller government while clutching my social security/medicaid check either.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on April 22, 2010, 05:05:07 PM
DIdn't say it was all his fault.... and the spending/income equation is spot on. Stupid people make and allow stupid decisions. How on God's green Earth do you justify a $30K income and are tols you can afford a $150k home???? and actually believe it.   :o
 
I don't collect SS or Medicaid but.... here is where the rubber does hit the road... albeit a lousy system of income and output.... WE.... I     paid into it and expect the check when eligible. Maybe we are stupid for thinking that the Govenment could INVEST and be caretaker on all of those funds they insisted we pay. That has the same taste of those with huge income tax return checks coming.... what???? you enjoy someone borrowing money from you with no interest???? Can I make a loan from you???? Not a bad Gig but...you couldn't think of a beeter place to use that money in so it would draw interest for YOU???? DOHHH. Some people shoul not be allowed to handle sharp objects :-\ . From what I am seeing in this is that we are ... yet again ...spending money we do not have on things we really do not need... at all levels.... Hmmmm an old Einstein saying about doing something over and over again and expecting a different outcome.... wasn't it called...INSANITY???? God help us all. Something needs to be made smaller.... your income? your benefits, your wants, your dreams or.... just maybe, yes.... the Government.
 
Dang, I knew it was all Obama's fault.  ::)
 
There are sectors of the economy that are doing well. My financial advisor once told me something that changed my perception. "You don't have a spending problem, you have an income problem." So I set out to fix that problem because I had cut to the bone and was still sinking.
 
I know I am one of the 'lucky' ones, but I got lucky because of hard work and sacrifice.
 
...and I don't protest for smaller government while clutching my social security/medicaid check either.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on April 24, 2010, 08:24:13 AM
Sheppard Smith, Fox News.

 
“If you check President Obama's last trip over-seas, his wife left just after
their visit to France. She has yet to accompany him to any Arab country. Think
about it. Why is Michelle returning to the states when ‘official’ trips to
foreign countries generally include the First Lady.”

Here’s one thought on the matter…
While in a Blockbuster renting videos I came across a video called "Obama".
There were two men standing next to me and we talked about President Obama.
These guys were Arabs, so I asked them why they thought Michele Obama headed
home following the President’s recent visit to France instead of traveling on to
Saudi Arabia and Turkey with her husband. They told me she could not go to Saudi
Arabia, Turkey or
Iraq . I said “Why not,(?) Laura Bush went to Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Dubai ."
They said that Obama is a Muslim and therefore he is not allowed to bring his
wife into countries that adhere to Sharia Law. Two points of interest here: 1) I
thought it interesting that two American Arabs at Blockbuster believe that our
President is a Muslim, 2) who
follows a strict Islamic creed. They also said that's the reason he bowed to the
King of Saudi Arabia.  It was a signal to the Muslim world, acknowledging his
religion.
For further consideration, here is a response from Dr. Jim Murk, a Middle
Eastern Scholar and expert on Islam. This is his explanation of what the Arab
American’s were saying.
"An orthodox Muslim man would never take his wife on a politically oriented trip
to any nation which practices Sharia law, particularly Saudi Arabia where the
Wahhabi sect is dominant. This is true and it is why Obama left Michelle in
Europe. She will stay home when he visits Arab countries. He knows Muslim
protocol; this includes, bowing to the Saudi King. Obama is regarded as a Muslim
in the Arab world, because he was born to a Muslim father; he acknowledged his
Muslim faith with George Stephanopoulus. Note that he downplays his involvement
with Christianity, by not publicly joining a Christian church in D.C. and
occasionally attending the chapel for services at Camp David. He also played
down the fact that America is a Christian country and said,
unbelievably, that it was one of the largest Muslim nations in the world, which
is nonsense. He has publicly taken the side of the Palestinians in the conflict
with Israel and he ignored the National Day of Prayer, something no other
President has ever done. He is bad news! He conceals his true faith to the
detriment of the American people." --- Jim Murk, Doctor of Philosophy in Middle
Eastern Culture & Religion.
ACTIONS speak louder than words.
Another interesting item regarding Sharia Law….
Why has Barack Hussein Obama insisted that the U.S. Attorney General hold the
trials of the 911 Muslim Terrorists in Civilian Courts as Common Criminals
instead of as Terrorists who attacked the United States of America?

If the Muslim Terrorists are tried in Military Tribunals, convicted and
sentenced to death, by LAW, Barack Hussein Obama, as President of the United
States, would be required to sign their Death Warrants. He would not be required
to sign the death warrants if they are sentenced to death by a Civilian Court.
Recently, Muslim Jihadist, Army Major Hassan
slaughtered non-Muslim, soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas rather than go to
Afghanistan and be a part of anything that could lead to the deaths of fellow
Muslims. He stated that Muslims ‘could not and should not kill fellow Muslims.’

Is the motive for Barack Hussein Obama's insistence on civilian trials, to make
sure he doesn't have to sign the death warrants for the Muslim Terrorists? Why
would he, as President of the United States, not sign the death warrants for
Muslim Terrorists who attacked the United States and murdered over 3,000 U. S.
Citizens on 9/11? Could it be that he is FORBIDDEN by his RELIGION to authorize
the execution of Muslims?
Think about that! Open your eyes, ears and mind to who the President is, how he
behaves and what he is doing.

 .AOLWebSuite .AOLPicturesFullSizeLink { height: 1px; width: 1px; overflow: hidden; } .AOLWebSuite a {color:blue; text-decoration: underline; cursor: pointer} .AOLWebSuite a.hsSig {cursor: default}


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on April 24, 2010, 11:33:54 AM
Folks.... I truly DO NOT LIKE OBAMA or his minions but if he has to go down.... let him accomplish this on his own. God knows he seems quite capable.
 
I haven't found anything on the Death Warrant item or if any of this was stated by Sheppard Smith.
 
We have to be careful as 10 Nov comes and again 2012. Don't give them anymore ammo that they need.
 
 
 http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/sharia.asp (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/sharia.asp)
 
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/m/michelle-obama-trip.htm (http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/m/michelle-obama-trip.htm)
 
Sheppard Smith, Fox News.

 
“If you check President Obama's last trip over-seas, his wife left just after
their visit to France. She has yet to accompany him to any Arab country. Think
about it. Why is Michelle returning to the states when ‘official’ trips to
foreign countries generally include the First Lady.”

Here’s one thought on the matter…
While in a Blockbuster renting videos I came across a video called "Obama".
There were two men standing next to me and we talked about President Obama.
These guys were Arabs, so I asked them why they thought Michele Obama headed
home following the President’s recent visit to France instead of traveling on to
Saudi Arabia and Turkey with her husband. They told me she could not go to Saudi
Arabia, Turkey or
Iraq . I said “Why not,(?) Laura Bush went to Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Dubai ."
They said that Obama is a Muslim and therefore he is not allowed to bring his
wife into countries that adhere to Sharia Law. Two points of interest here: 1) I
thought it interesting that two American Arabs at Blockbuster believe that our
President is a Muslim, 2) who
follows a strict Islamic creed. They also said that's the reason he bowed to the
King of Saudi Arabia.  It was a signal to the Muslim world, acknowledging his
religion.
For further consideration, here is a response from Dr. Jim Murk, a Middle
Eastern Scholar and expert on Islam. This is his explanation of what the Arab
American’s were saying.
"An orthodox Muslim man would never take his wife on a politically oriented trip
to any nation which practices Sharia law, particularly Saudi Arabia where the
Wahhabi sect is dominant. This is true and it is why Obama left Michelle in
Europe. She will stay home when he visits Arab countries. He knows Muslim
protocol; this includes, bowing to the Saudi King. Obama is regarded as a Muslim
in the Arab world, because he was born to a Muslim father; he acknowledged his
Muslim faith with George Stephanopoulus. Note that he downplays his involvement
with Christianity, by not publicly joining a Christian church in D.C. and
occasionally attending the chapel for services at Camp David. He also played
down the fact that America is a Christian country and said,
unbelievably, that it was one of the largest Muslim nations in the world, which
is nonsense. He has publicly taken the side of the Palestinians in the conflict
with Israel and he ignored the National Day of Prayer, something no other
President has ever done. He is bad news! He conceals his true faith to the
detriment of the American people." --- Jim Murk, Doctor of Philosophy in Middle
Eastern Culture & Religion.
ACTIONS speak louder than words.
Another interesting item regarding Sharia Law….
Why has Barack Hussein Obama insisted that the U.S. Attorney General hold the
trials of the 911 Muslim Terrorists in Civilian Courts as Common Criminals
instead of as Terrorists who attacked the United States of America?

If the Muslim Terrorists are tried in Military Tribunals, convicted and
sentenced to death, by LAW, Barack Hussein Obama, as President of the United
States, would be required to sign their Death Warrants. He would not be required
to sign the death warrants if they are sentenced to death by a Civilian Court.
Recently, Muslim Jihadist, Army Major Hassan
slaughtered non-Muslim, soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas rather than go to
Afghanistan and be a part of anything that could lead to the deaths of fellow
Muslims. He stated that Muslims ‘could not and should not kill fellow Muslims.’

Is the motive for Barack Hussein Obama's insistence on civilian trials, to make
sure he doesn't have to sign the death warrants for the Muslim Terrorists? Why
would he, as President of the United States, not sign the death warrants for
Muslim Terrorists who attacked the United States and murdered over 3,000 U. S.
Citizens on 9/11? Could it be that he is FORBIDDEN by his RELIGION to authorize
the execution of Muslims?
Think about that! Open your eyes, ears and mind to who the President is, how he
behaves and what he is doing.

 .AOLWebSuite .AOLPicturesFullSizeLink { height: 1px; width: 1px; overflow: hidden; } .AOLWebSuite a {color:blue; text-decoration: underline; cursor: pointer} .AOLWebSuite a.hsSig {cursor: default}


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on April 25, 2010, 04:36:42 PM
What Kind of Socialist I Barack Obama?

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/what-kind-of-socialist-is-barack-obama--15421 (http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/what-kind-of-socialist-is-barack-obama--15421)

Very well thought out piece I think. The question isn't whether he is or not - the question is more, how far does this go?


Title: Re: TEA Party May 8th
Post by: olivebranch on April 26, 2010, 06:29:53 AM
Is anyone going to the TEA Party on May 8th at the Crawford County Fairgrounds? My hubby and the kids and I are planning on attending and speaking for a little bit...


Title: Re: TEA Party May 8th
Post by: Lifetime on April 26, 2010, 07:23:32 AM
There is going to be another one at the Mercer County Court House 3 July as well.
 
 
Is anyone going to the TEA Party on May 8th at the Crawford County Fairgrounds? My hubby and the kids and I are planning on attending and speaking for a little bit...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on April 28, 2010, 07:11:30 AM
It can't be ALL of Obama's fault.... look at who he has to work with.... ( I hope this opens )
 
http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2010/04/who-doesnt-get-it.html (http://stanleyfeldmdmace.typepad.com/repairing_the_healthcare_/2010/04/who-doesnt-get-it.html)
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 02, 2010, 09:03:33 AM
Well - here's some food for thought. A national ID Card is being proposed (again.) The ACLU doesn't like the idea . . . me neither.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/95235-democrats-spark-alarm-with-call-for-national-id-card (http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/95235-democrats-spark-alarm-with-call-for-national-id-card)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on May 02, 2010, 10:23:15 AM
All I can think of with this is the old WWII movies with the Nazi's stating "your papers please"



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on May 02, 2010, 11:17:33 AM
Personally, I am not seeing the hoopla against a State and now several states that post and pass a law that is already almost verbatim of the Fed Statuate. What does bother me is that if it is a Fed Law and the Feds DO NOT do a damned thing.... and I were finding dead bodies and missing family members..... I would be learning to protect my own. One of the JOBS of the FED is to PROTECT..... If they can't DO the job, then I don't blame people for picking up the banner. And PAPERS PLEASE is simplistic at best. When was the last time...and they are allowed (Given a reason) have you been stopped by authorities???? I am always asked for certain PAPERS and an ID. Civilian and Military are always asked, given the circumstance. Now.... if the person is a documented ALIEN ( AS IN FROM ANY DAMNED COUNTRY) they are REQUIRED by law to have the proper paperwork on their person if there is a request after it is deemed they need to be asked.
 
I do agree, an effort should be made, once a violation is found.... to inquire as to what is the reason they are here and if so, are they employeed by anyone here. After that... a pound or ton of "flesh" should be removed from the employer...be it money or jailtime. I don't give a Rats Patoot if the ILLEGAL has family here or not. If I stole a car or killed someone or had enough speeding tickets to go to jail, WHO gives a ratz azz if I have a wife and kids??? I BROKE THE LAW!!! Period.
 
On a lighter side.... I saw some of those protests and I have to wonder..... how many are on any public dole and don't even work and they are backing ALIENS who do work and risk their freedom to do so. Kind of a dichotomy, don'tcha think????
 
This all smells of the same hidden reasoning behind HR2499 and HR157. and add to that, any jailtime Con. Gutierrez of ILL gets.... he deserves. I have been in committee with him and he can exheed an azz clown level.
 
My point is.... if someone has the JOB to protect you and can't/won't..... what are your options? And please DO NOT think this ILLEGAL Immigrant problem is just for TX, AZ, NM, CA. The PA State Police have pulled over their fair share of them here and in the past, ICE has just told them to release them. I know for a fact that many follow the crops as they rippen, coming north into any fruit/veg area they can make a buck in. Some are DOCUMENTED but some ARE NOT. So PA, NY ,MD are not immune from the problem. Oh and for pickers.... when my wife was younger, a teen, she use to pick fruit ....for what you say???? The money..... and she is a homegrown PA woman.  I use to "HAY".... if there are still people who remember that.
 
If a Cop or Military were to stop me and ask for paperwork/ID... I would do it. How many of you would not show a measly Bartender and ID to prove you were 21 or could get into a skin movie??? A lot of you who attend Political Rallies for our POTUS and such HAVE to turn in info...to include you SSN to even get to attend. We give up ID to spend a check at a store and now we bitch about authorities asking for ID..... Give me a break. Priorities are screwed up if you ask me. To identify your "enemy", look in the mirror.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 02, 2010, 05:40:04 PM
It ain't so much the ID part as much as what's proposed to go on (in) it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on May 02, 2010, 07:47:27 PM
And what part is it that makes yuo say that??? Are you a 666 disciple????
 
When you were born... you got a name, Blood type and SSN
 
Since that day... that info has went a million directions... now in some circumstances, ( Military, incarceration... etc.) you have given up your DNA. Background checks for employment to include credit.... and a thorough FBI check if you have a clearance.... and don't forget the $10 you spend just to accompany your own child on a field trip, on a PSP check. What in he!! else do you have that they don't already know...aside from the birthmark on your left thigh that is shaped like Duranti's nose??????? The only secret you know is one NO ONE else has shared.
 
You gave up anonimity the minute you took your first breath and crapped green. Our only freedom in this is to not be in a situation that requires someone to ask.... Identification please???? This didn't just start...... this type of thing has been going on since one clan member smelled a stranger to see if they were part of theirs.... and then either shared the Bear meat or became part of the meal..... it is now just more sophisicated. My point is.... are they legal or illegal???? I don't care what language they speak.
 
 
 
It ain't so much the ID part as much as what's proposed to go on (in) it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 03, 2010, 08:00:10 AM
Well - your post kinda goes to my point. It's just one more thing in a long line of things over the years meant to classify us and provide information about us.

Which really does indicate some willful stupidity on my part too though. I mean - if I have a facebook account . . . I suppose any idea of privacy is shot.

Maybe I ought to go be Amish. Though - there's probably a conspiracy of mules somewhere there too.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 03, 2010, 08:34:22 AM
That could be what they call a group of mules by the way. I mean - group of crows is a murder - maybe a group of mules (or donkeys) is a conspiracy.

I'm sure Glenn Beck thinks so!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 03, 2010, 12:38:49 PM
An EXCELLENT opinion piece by Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704302304575214613784530750.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704302304575214613784530750.html)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on May 03, 2010, 02:16:34 PM
I think you have some great material for amateur night at Jr.'s Life.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 03, 2010, 03:22:02 PM
I've had people suggest that to me in the past - but I don't know. I kinda messed around with a couple things at a congerence I was yet about a year ago. It went over OK . . . most folks got up and told jokes. I told stories. Standing up in front of people being funny is far more difficult than being funny in response to just talking with folks.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on May 03, 2010, 11:54:27 PM
This is the information age.There's good and bad with everything .There is a guy down south of here that teaches people how to drop off the grid. Stuff like how to own property, but not in your name ect . Life , his ideas might be better than goin Amish. Are you willing to give up the electric guitar?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 04, 2010, 07:12:26 AM
If I REALLY went Amish - I'd have to give up guitar altogether!

Meh. I'm not utterly convinced of the idea yet. Though little steps are made here and there - here and there.

BTW - that WSJ post was an exceelent one. I hope some folks took the time to read it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on May 04, 2010, 07:29:38 AM
No guitar?  How come?  I will have to ask my amish friend Daniel about this.  He is so cool about answering all of my dumb questions. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on May 04, 2010, 08:11:51 AM
I think Puff means living entirely off the grid with no electricity, running water, etc. OPne can of course purchase a generator. I had a few friends in Alaska that were off the grid entirely except for their automobile registration and a PO box. It's a simple life, but it's not easy.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on May 04, 2010, 11:49:30 PM
Life, you could go acoustic!!.
 
NP, instead of saying "dropping off the grid" I should have said, this guy teaches them to submerge themselves out of view. Drop off the radar is more appropriate.
Example: one of this guys students wanted to purchase some land from a neighbor. They agreed on a price, however the buyer stipulated that the transaction must be by "a contract for deed" . Which means say the price agreed was $100,000,
the buyer would pay $90,000 up front and $500 a year for 20 years. Until the contract is closed by the final payment the name on the deed would be that of the seller, not the buyer.Property taxes billed to the seller, who would be reimbursed by the buyer. All payments would be by gold/silver no cash, check or bank draft or mortgage. Who needs that shit! but it happens. They own the property, but who knows about it.
Electricity the same. If you have it, you can have a well. I'll get more info on this guy if it's around and post it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on May 05, 2010, 07:33:38 AM
You would have to go truly amish to truly drop off the radar.  No electric bill, no car insurance/registration,  stuff aforementioned.   Many have bank accounts.  But you don't have to.   If when you were born, you were delivered by your grandmother at home and a SS# was never applied for....and at the age of 16 you left the amish life........it could definately be done- but it would have to start on day one.

Re: the guitar.....Do amish listen to and/or enjoy/indulge in such things as music?  Besides singing in church?  Do they sing in church?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on May 05, 2010, 07:47:02 AM
It perplexes me as to WHY a person wants to be "glossed out" of society.... God forbid that they get sick or a victim of a crime or fire.... As an individual, that may be fine but if you have family? (http://forum.eeticket.com/Smileys/default/huh.gif) ?
 
Amish ... I laugh at ANYONE who thinks they are free of the "ENGLISH". You look at the Amish in our area and they are so different from the ones out near Harrisburg. Here you see them riding in Vans...and some of those Vans are theirs but driven by "ENGLISH". Our East, I have a friend who has Amish friends who dress ENGLISH to go to Biker Events with him and friends. I also had a friend in Mercer who never locked his doors on his farm and almost every Sat. morning he and his wife would come downstairs to find Amish Children in his livingroom watching cartoons. Sometimes things are not always as they seem.
 
Good luck with Dropping off the Grid and dropping out.... In the end, you will need your SS check, retirement, oh and did I mention census??? Hide if you want.... there is ALWAYS a trail. You can make it so you don't pay for things indirectly but..... I love those who cook and heat with wood or some other means other than electric or NG. HMMMM does the Fuel Fairy give you the wood??? Or do you use YOUR hard and valuable time acquiring the fuel??? This may work out when you are young but you never miss a birthday. People can go to a well but... price out a well and pumps... unless it is shallow and a hand pump... you have to have a generator to run the pump and equipment to store and send the water. If it breaks..it is on you to fix... Ever price out just replacing a deep well pump and the cost of retrieving it and repacing it??? Or maybe having to resleeve a well? (http://forum.eeticket.com/Smileys/default/huh.gif) Here is a good one.... SOLAR PANELS.... if they save so much, why do they offer...for now ... rebates??? Everything that we are told will help is either Labor Intensive or UPFRONT expensive.... It all evens out in the end.
 
And the Gold you talk about.... I think there is more to owning GOLD than those hawkers saying "I have owned gold for 10 years." Gold is a collectible, subject to inflationary tax on the perceived "value". If you "own" it.... you have to "store" it. How much would that cost if the company stored it for you ( and you still don't touch it) or how do you store it? (http://forum.eeticket.com/Smileys/default/huh.gif) Where do you store it? In the ground??? and who would know??? I looked and it seems that if you didn't "buy " any gold when it was Governmentally priced at $32 per oz in the 60s and 70s.... you don't get rich for sure.
 
So grab your "Seagull Acoustic and your Hohner" and sit around yer campfire, up wind from the place you relieve yourself, and enjoy life LOL. Oh... I have lived on a farm when younger where the only utility we had was electricity, but I kinda like not having to change clothes in the winter night to my OUTHOUSE clothes to take a late night "Potty Break" and not sittin' in the outhouse while the pigs are up and sniffing the cracks in the boards between their pen and you. Oh and Bath Night was another story.... but I won't bore you anymore.....
 
As the Great Frank Zappa once lamented...
  "What's there to live for?  Who needs the peace corps?  Think I'll just DROP OUT  I'll go to Frisco  Buy a wig & sleep  On Owsley's floor..." 
 
My answer to any who really want to "drop out".... Move out of the United States altogether. IMHO

 
 
Life, you could go acoustic!!.
 
NP, instead of saying "dropping off the grid" I should have said, this guy teaches them to submerge themselves out of view. Drop off the radar is more appropriate.
Example: one of this guys students wanted to purchase some land from a neighbor. They agreed on a price, however the buyer stipulated that the transaction must be by "a contract for deed" . Which means say the price agreed was $100,000,
the buyer would pay $90,000 up front and $500 a year for 20 years. Until the contract is closed by the final payment the name on the deed would be that of the seller, not the buyer.Property taxes billed to the seller, who would be reimbursed by the buyer. All payments would be by gold/silver no cash, check or bank draft or mortgage. Who needs that shit! but it happens. They own the property, but who knows about it.
Electricity the same. If you have it, you can have a well. I'll get more info on this guy if it's around and post it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on May 05, 2010, 08:23:55 AM
gee whiz lifetime.....we are just discussing if and how it could be done.  And I think it could.  As in my basic outline above.  Relax already.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 05, 2010, 08:26:36 AM
lol - in the words of Robert Young . . .

"It might be your coffee!"


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on May 05, 2010, 08:40:26 AM
I kinda like not having to change clothes in the winter night to my OUTHOUSE clothes to take a late night "Potty Break" and not sittin' in the outhouse while the pigs are up and sniffing the cracks in the boards between their pen and you. 

Lifetime, the imagery obtained from your statement is priceless! Whenever I have a "midnight bathroom need", although  inside, I will now sit and shiver...dreading the possibility of "pigs snuffling at my "cracks" "


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on May 05, 2010, 08:49:17 AM
Believe it or not.... I am very relaxed..... I just find humor in people figuing out how to run, hide, or just disappear. God has the final actuary and I hope it doesn't happen too soon. We are humans... looking for love, anonimity and security.....I just believe you cannot have a hold on all three at the same time. There will always be a hole that leads back to YOU.
 
gee whiz lifetime.....we are just discussing if and how it could be done.  And I think it could.  As in my basic outline above.  Relax already.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 05, 2010, 10:34:15 AM
Quote
We are humans... looking for love, anonimity and security.....I just believe you cannot have a hold on all three at the same time.

Interesting thought. I'll turn that over in my head for a while.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on May 05, 2010, 12:20:14 PM
Everyones definition of all three are different.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 05, 2010, 12:23:18 PM
http://patchworknation.csmonitor.com/ (http://patchworknation.csmonitor.com/)

Not really anything to do with the Obama Administration - but an interesting demographic map. I played with it for a while. Some surprising information . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on May 05, 2010, 12:58:41 PM
Interesting comparison. I suppose Whole Food shoppers would never be caught dead in a Cracker Barrel.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on May 05, 2010, 10:59:15 PM
lol - in the words of Robert Young . . .

"It might be your coffee!"


Oh lord!!

The Geek knows of  the guy. Name is George Gordon, from the town of Isabella down near the Arkansas line. Guy has a webpage.
http://library.georgegordon.com/ (http://library.georgegordon.com/)

included is a synopsis of classes available, and he also mentions CD's available, to be paid for in gold coin.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on May 07, 2010, 07:35:13 AM
Those are two very scary articles! I wonder what else has been buried in legislation that we don't know about?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 07, 2010, 08:34:50 AM
The issues addressed in the first article were expected, but not reported by anyone - except maybe Fox. Now that the bill has passed though - it'll be analyzed.

Stupid myopic press.

The second article is the one I find far more disturbing. I mean - don't you think that perhaps government might abtually find a way to make our lives - I don't know - LESS complicated?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on May 07, 2010, 09:28:17 AM
Well... the government's agenda seems to be employing itself rather than us.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on May 07, 2010, 10:39:17 AM
9.9% unemployment on average ...going up and the funny thing.... this includes the Census workers. I said it before and will again..... as our kids graduate and hit the Grid for a job.... we still have baby machines popping more out on the other end. The percentage of unemployed will go up now, even though there may be more jobs but not yet more than the constant amount of people looking and those who are under or temp employed. The numbers will never match in this economy. I may be Greek but I don't want use to be Greece.
 
They will continue to press crap into bills in the hopes that most will not read and discover... Like a PA legislator that proposes fees to be paid for anyone coming into PA on our highways...Money to be due to PENNDOT... not the Turnpike Commission and the other who proposed a unicameral legislation for PA.... I almost fell on the floor...if THAT was such a good idea, why in hell is there only ONE state (NEB) that practices that???? People have to dig deeper. As long as most polititians write, speak, or agree....we need to put them under a microscope because ...all isn't as it should be. IMHO
 
 
 
Well... the government's agenda seems to be employing itself rather than us.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on May 08, 2010, 04:18:10 PM
I am curious.....
 
Is there ANYONE other than I who notices a whistle when Obama speaks????? I mean... FOR GOD's SAKE... he is the POTUS and sounds like he has second hand dentures in his mouth. My Grandmother did the same thing but she made a hell of a lot less money and had a lousy dental plan. LOL


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on May 08, 2010, 06:49:32 PM
Those are two very scary articles! I wonder what else has been buried in legislation that we don't know about?



Well, this isn't buired in legislation, but it's been well hidden.

http://www.wimp.com/copymachines/ (http://www.wimp.com/copymachines/)



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 09, 2010, 12:07:13 AM
I am curious.....
 
Is there ANYONE other than I who notices a whistle when Obama speaks????? I mean... FOR GOD's SAKE... he is the POTUS and sounds like he has second hand dentures in his mouth. My Grandmother did the same thing but she made a hell of a lot less money and had a lousy dental plan. LOL

Yeah - sounds a bit like an old beaver character on a Warner Brothers cartoon.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 17, 2010, 12:35:01 PM
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_2_soviet-archives.html (http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_2_soviet-archives.html)

The above article is regarding documents smuggled out of Russia regarding the workings of the former USSR. There is an interesting passage in it regarding Joe Biden - but more importantly - it's about the fruits of the ideology.

Why anyone would embrace the idea of communism and socialism given their track history (which by some accounts is being revised bit by bit in our educational system) is beyond me. The article is a little lengthy (by today's sound byte standards) but WELL worth a read.

The question is: Why aren't these documents getting a good once over here in the U.S.?

Probably because the answer isn't very pretty at all . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on May 17, 2010, 12:53:17 PM
Nice article Life. Well written and grammatically correct  ;D  It took a few minutes to read but wll worth it.
There must be software out there that will auto-translate these documents. Maybe a few conversions or scans beforehand, but it shouldn't be that bad.
...or we can have all those unemployed Russian majors manually translate them...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 17, 2010, 06:46:45 PM
Proponents of the socialist / communist mindset aren't all that much different than holocaust deniers when it comes right down to it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 18, 2010, 12:50:03 PM
An article from the American Thinker - on addiction - - - and how we're all hooked. It's an apt analogy . . . the question becomes: Now what?

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/let_it_burn.html (http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/05/let_it_burn.html)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on May 18, 2010, 09:04:54 PM
I am told the choices on the democratic ticket here in PA were slim to nada?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on May 19, 2010, 08:12:06 AM
As luck would have it.... All the ones but ONE that I voted for ..made the cut. I am GOP. My choice for who runs against Dahlkemper was a crap shoot but... Kelly won the nomination. As much as I had interacted with Specter in the past.... when Obama flew over PA to get to Youngstown yesterday.... his fate was written. Obama got what he wanted out of him so..... see ya wouldn't want to be ya..... Biden had tried to get Specter to Come on Over...for years and when he finally did...... well you saw the out come...promises or not. Nature of the Beast. If Politicians can't trust each other.... what law is there that we should as well?? It is a blood sport and the source of the blood on the floor isn't important as much as the agenda.
 
I did a write in of a DEM on my ballot... He was not opposed but he is a good man and not a Philly DEM.  There is a big difference. Kelly got the call to run against Dahlkemper and if I were her... I would be sweating.... not so much that Kelly won but... the fact that the nutjob Marin got a fair share of the votes..... this is from people in her own party. It just seems to send a message..... Hmmm Specter again....
 
We won't see the result of the "Johnny/Janey Come Latelys" who jumped into the race on a whim... for about 2 weeks and the absentees later as well.
 
I am still laughing at people who poo pood the Teaparty, and woke up this morning taking another look. Even the POTUS has taken to calling them the derogetory term "TEABAGGERS". I still have to think that people who use this term have an intimate relationship with the term and practice...  :o .. Maybe they got introduced to it, in a hazing from their High School teammates....
 
In all.... this will be playing out on up to 2012 and beyond.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on May 19, 2010, 07:06:53 PM
http://www.huckpac.com:80/?Fuseaction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=3086 (http://www.huckpac.com:80/?Fuseaction=Blogs.View&Blog_id=3086)
 
 
Nancy says you can all quit your jobs now! Obama will take care of you!
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 21, 2010, 08:28:07 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703315404575250264210294510.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703315404575250264210294510.html)

No - you can't keep your health plan.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on May 21, 2010, 08:47:04 AM
BOHICA Life. Want to stay healthy? Using my best evangalistic voice .....I want you to dig deeeeeep into your pockets.....



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on May 21, 2010, 12:15:28 PM
Life: Dude has a dog in the fight. He's biased. It will flesh itself out. The bigger issue is just keeping America healthy. There are a LOT of seriously unhealthy people out tere stressing the system. That's the problem. It's like highways: The more congested, the more lanes they build. After a while they just turn it into a toll road, when the real solution would be to draw down the number of cars with alternative transportation.
 
We have hit the toll booth on health care. I'm getting on my bike  ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 21, 2010, 01:32:18 PM
Tife - interesting analogy. I'm stickin' to the bike too. Right turn boneheads aside - I think it's the best healthcare I got right now.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on May 21, 2010, 01:50:07 PM
When all is said and done... I dig into my mind numbing past and have one thing to say about just about everything jammed our way...
 
"ASS, GAS, or GRASS, NOBODY rides for FREE!!!" Roll another one, just like the other one........


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 28, 2010, 08:34:16 PM
A little prediction from Market Watch in the WSJ.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/crash-is-dead-ahead-sell-get-liquid-now-2010-05-25 (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/crash-is-dead-ahead-sell-get-liquid-now-2010-05-25)

Not a good one . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on May 28, 2010, 08:36:57 PM
And . . . an onteresting issue with the census:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/two_more_census_workers_blow_the_OqY80N3DBTvL17VmxKKR0O (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/two_more_census_workers_blow_the_OqY80N3DBTvL17VmxKKR0O)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on May 28, 2010, 08:52:53 PM
knowing the paperwork involved in hiring someone, and the seemingly endless discussions with HR, and 7 year document retention requirements in many companies when terminating a employee, that if the story is true then all the people they would have had to hire to process this woman would have lowered the unemployment figure at least 2 points. ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 01, 2010, 12:19:23 PM
S4nator Bob (Lurch) Casey has a brilliant idea:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303491304575188263180553530.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303491304575188263180553530.html)

Not.

Essentially - this is like subsidizing criminal behavior. (But then - so is a lot of SSI . . . ) A quote from the article:

Quote
The financial crash is partly to blame, but even before 2006 only about 6% of multi-employer plans were fully funded, compared to about 31% of single-employer plans. The real problem is that multi-employer plans have become a sort of pension Ponzi scheme.

Unions love multi-employer plans because they let workers keep their retirement benefits even if they switch jobs to another participating company. This encourages lifelong union membership. Unions are less enthusiastic about paying the bills. The negotiating priority of union leaders is to get hefty wage increases and benefits for current workers, leaving the scraps to the pensions of retirees who no longer vote in union elections.



Unions look out for the union administration - much less so the "members" (many of which are forced to be in a lot of shops.)



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 04, 2010, 07:19:26 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/03/AR2010060304920.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/03/AR2010060304920.html)

The further we go in time, the more we see this Administration promising hope and change is very much the same old same old . . . promoting itslef and its agenda - and not engaging past first-level thinking. (Unless of course all this is intentional.) l

Robert Gibbs is 'charming' by the way.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 06, 2010, 10:26:22 AM
One of the local mental health providers here in the county is no longer accepting medicare insurance. I'm wondering if this is a portent of things to come.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on June 07, 2010, 08:10:26 AM
Not accepting medicare?  That has to be some sort of sign.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 07, 2010, 12:06:54 PM
It ain't good - it might just be a "them" thing though as docs are panelled differently on different coverages. Thing is though - Medicare took a wallop in the new Healthcare Law . . .

We'll see. they passed it - so now we'll see what's in it! (thank Mrs. Pelosi - such a sage she is.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 07, 2010, 12:54:55 PM
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6535I220100607 (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6535I220100607)

600000 Chryslers recalled for problems similar to Toyotas. Gee I wonder if Congress will look into this in the same way. After all - we do own part of the company . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 08, 2010, 07:20:32 AM
I was talkin' 'bout the types of problems (i.e. accelerator sticking) - not how they came about to public knowledge. But - yes, you're right. Not the same in that way.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 08, 2010, 08:37:18 AM
Ya know - sometimes I get the feeling this Administration has turned into some kind of reality TV show. Every day I see headlines of "Obama says . . . " Facebook blurts out stuff from the White House and OFA - I don't have a twitter account (thank God) - but I imagine he's active there too.

It's a non-stop campaign and PR blitz. Seriously. The news cycle is crazy.

Now he wants to know who's ass he's gonna kick (his words) for the mess in the Gulf.

It'd be funny if weren't so serious . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on June 08, 2010, 12:30:40 PM
Quote
Now he wants to know who's ass he's gonna kick

I thought that was hilarious. George Carlin must be laughing in his grave right now, and to thing they used to actually *bleep* that word!
 
Maybe the'll put Obama in a cage match with Tony Hayward....now THAT would be a ratings coup...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on June 08, 2010, 02:03:46 PM
I'd bet Barry would be a pretty good contender.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on June 10, 2010, 09:57:23 PM
KO,  I love that article.  It is a shame what he represents and is putting OUR country and it's people through.  Only by his, and his willing followers actions, will the common, lower vibration Souls, FINALLY will start questioning things.  As they are able to raise their Christ-God frequency, they will be able to tell persons of deceit, false character, etc.  This is a part of the global shift that is going on now and is part of the 2012  changes that are and will occur.  It is going to be rough for most of us.  One way that I am staying grounded is by reading the Daily and Weekly messages from the website www.spiritlibrary.com (http://www.spiritlibrary.com/) which is a treasure chest of current channeled Spiritual information.  It is best understood by those who are currently of higher Spiritual vibration, but is of benefit for all those of open mind, no matter where they are on their "path". 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on June 10, 2010, 10:15:53 PM
How on earth do you figure he is half Arab?  Obama's Kenyan ethnicity is Luo, one of the largest tribes in Kenya (Kikuyu being the largest).  No hint of Arab, not even Swahili, on his Kenyan side. (Swahili culture is a mix of African, Arab and Indian cultures and peoples, on the coast of Kenya, Tanzania and Zanzibar)

His father, Barack Obama Sr. had been a Moslem but abandoned the faith and was an atheist by the time he came to the US to be educated. If anything, the old man died a legless drunk (due to car accidents). He was in conflict with Jomo Kenyatta's regime and that destroyed his career and ultimately his life.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 12, 2010, 10:44:16 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/02/AR2010060203278.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/02/AR2010060203278.html)

An excellent opinion piece by George Will. Worth a read regardless of your political stripe.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: rubarb on June 12, 2010, 11:29:15 AM
I'm sorry but I don't feel Obama is doing anything wrong in the way he is handling the oil spill. Not Bush or anyone else would make a difference. If there is someone out there that can stop the leak and clean up this mess, get to it and stop condeming one person because he doesn't have the answer.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 12, 2010, 12:05:10 PM
Oil spill from the source... maybe it isn't a fault of Bam Bam but it isn't Bush's fault as well, but they do their damnedest to spin it to Bush...We need to allow those who know the situation, to correct it. BP doesn't want this oil to keep coming out...that is money lost and they don't want to pay anymore reparations than they should. I am starting to see this start a push to dump killer taxes on the oil industry and I hope we all are not so stupid as to believe this cost will not be laid on us in the form of fuel tax increases as well as a rise in the cost of ANYTHING hauled by a vehicle to include a bus full of school children to winter heating.....again.
 
Now..the CLEAN UP on the beaches and tribs.... Another story.... it has come down to UNION jobs..... Now that is Bam Bam's Area... he can forego certain laws to allow for Non union workers to be used. He can also hold these workers feet to the fire to have them actually working and not sitting around. Deligation is only as good as those in charge.
 
What I am saying is that his hands are NOT clean and he has not executed authority's that he does have, so he won't infuriate his "base" ( read donators/votes).
 
This whole thing is turning into an opportunity to fight against drilling and to push Cap and Trade as well as the "Tree Hugger" agenda. Stopping the flow of this oil has been benched as the priority in political circles. Watch where your finger is pointing, it may be loaded and the ones who just might have the answers will be too busy ducking to actually solve this.
 
 
I'm sorry but I don't feel Obama is doing anything wrong in the way he is handling the oil spill. Not Bush or anyone else would make a difference. If there is someone out there that can stop the leak and clean up this mess, get to it and stop condemning one person because he doesn't have the answer.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 12, 2010, 12:08:12 PM
And all of that type of thinking has it's roots in the following article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/02/AR2010060203278.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/02/AR2010060203278.html)

Bumping it because it's worth reading.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on June 12, 2010, 12:17:59 PM
Yeah, I agree with Rhubarb.  This is an unprecendented disaster of an unimaginable magnitude. We will be hearing about this for the rest of our lives, barring some sort of miracle that only God can pull off.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 13, 2010, 10:39:36 AM
Some food for thought for those that are thoughtful . . . .

RSA Animate Matthew Taylor: Left brain, right brain (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql3Jp3ydfE8&feature=related#ws)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 14, 2010, 10:00:59 AM
Here is a thought.... the "Jones Act". Obama hasn't lifted it but Bush did during a crisis (Katrina). It seems that when lifted...it allowed other countries to offer and assist during the crisis. Many countries have offered to help with the Oil Crisis in the Gulf but as of now... prevented from doing so beyond some equipment. No foriegn vessels with foreign crews. Beginning to sound like AMERICAN UNION issues are involved. Just a thought..
 
 
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-jones-act.htm (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-jones-act.htm)
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on June 14, 2010, 02:32:11 PM
Here is a thought.... the "Jones Act". Obama hasn't lifted it but Bush did during a crisis (Katrina). It seems that when lifted...it allowed other countries to offer and assist during the crisis. Many countries have offered to help with the Oil Crisis in the Gulf but as of now... prevented from doing so beyond some equipment. No foriegn vessels with foreign crews. Beginning to sound like AMERICAN UNION issues are involved. Just a thought..


Yeah.. one of them there foreign scholars suggested we fire off a nuke.... supposedly to plug the hole... ?

I'm not so sure prohibiting the foreign help is a bad idea.

On another note.. did you see this article?

[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37677987/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times?GT1=43001[/url] ([url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37677987/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times?GT1=43001[/url])

 
 
[url]http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-jones-act.htm[/url] ([url]http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-jones-act.htm[/url])
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 14, 2010, 03:16:11 PM
The NUKE solution was first brought up by an American who was in the Nuclear Navy of our country. In the conversation with him, he kinda  ::)  stated that they had done this before  ???
 
What I point to is offerr of the type of ships we NEED from foreign countries with FOREIGNERS working them...not to mention equipment offered that the Brain Trusts we have is not "compatable"...... with what????? I don't care if the toilet paper is made by one company or another as long as it gets "the job done."
 
As this crap opens up..the DEMS are trying ...once again to play the Cap and Trade ploy and the Environmental card. I use fossil fuels...and to get almost everything I have...I rely on them. Let this ploy go on and we will fall into the same trap set for us in 1973 and even up to a few years ago. One well DOES NOT shorten the supply as much as regulations. I was there for the FAKE shortage in 1973. It reeked of dead fish, day one.
 
This disaster is the fault of those who operated, regulated, and overlooked....by that I mean those in Government past and present and BP. It is on their backs and does not mean it should be, yet again the American Public who has to open yet another vein to feed these Vampires.
 
I don't care if you do ride a bicycle or burn wood in your fireplace..... you are tied to the same crap as the rest of us and if you just laugh and say..it ain't your problem.... don't expect others to come to your aid when the curtain comes down on your life. The Farmers never came to any aid for the Industrial community and the other way around..... check "yer histry" book class.... we lost a lot in both. Watch this crap real close folks.....
 
 
Here is a thought.... the "Jones Act". Obama hasn't lifted it but Bush did during a crisis (Katrina). It seems that when lifted...it allowed other countries to offer and assist during the crisis. Many countries have offered to help with the Oil Crisis in the Gulf but as of now... prevented from doing so beyond some equipment. No foriegn vessels with foreign crews. Beginning to sound like AMERICAN UNION issues are involved. Just a thought..


Yeah.. one of them there foreign scholars suggested we fire off a nuke.... supposedly to plug the hole... ?

I'm not so sure prohibiting the foreign help is a bad idea.

On another note.. did you see this article?

[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37677987/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times?GT1=43001[/url] ([url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37677987/ns/world_news-the_new_york_times?GT1=43001[/url])

 
 
[url]http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-jones-act.htm[/url] ([url]http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-jones-act.htm[/url])
 
 



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on June 15, 2010, 07:45:01 AM
Quote
I don't care if you do ride a bicycle or burn wood in your fireplace..

...not sure where you're going there but that's all I can do. Mostly 'cause I'm a cheap Scotsman and won't pay much more for gas or electric...
 
We had this discussion here before, we really can't drop 'off the grid'. but I pride myself in being infinitely flexible in times of trouble.
 
I guess I need to buy little pieces of lead instead ... ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 15, 2010, 08:05:20 AM
Here is where "I AM GOING" with this.... Since we know you can't completely leave the "GRID" at some time, long past you allowing the cars to die off or oil to be drilled for in any appreciable manner... even people who are like you will feel the pain for lack of things you will need and can't find or afford to just live the Spartan Life. And in allowing your voice to be silent for the others, you will have no one to listen and speak with you as well. Whether you are on the top deck of the ship or in the hold.... if the ship sinks..it is only a matter of time before you start sucking for air.... no matter what deck you are on.
 
And I didn't target you specifically but I tend to dislike the company of Full Blown Tree Huggers. If you do it to save money and your own resources..I have NO problem, but if it becomes a chant for me to change the way I live..I now have a problem with that. I hate most sports but I don't distance myself from friends who love sports... because they don't do anything to force their passion on me. The Government tends to dictate and makes Laws on things that I feel they don't have the right to do but they have people of an ilk that push agendas, regardless of the percentage of people liking it. So yes... I do have a bit of ajeda when the Government says they are best at solving problems.
 
And flexibility has to end when your lips touch your own arse... or that of others in the process.
 
 
Quote
I don't care if you do ride a bicycle or burn wood in your fireplace..

...not sure where you're going there but that's all I can do. Mostly 'cause I'm a cheap Scotsman and won't pay much more for gas or electric...
 
We had this discussion here before, we really can't drop 'off the grid'. but I pride myself in being infinitely flexible in times of trouble.
 
I guess I need to buy little pieces of lead instead ... ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 15, 2010, 08:38:22 AM
For a time - I thought dropping off the grid was the answer, but after some research and consideration, I've reached about that same conclusion. We're gonna sink or swim, and mostly toigether. Given the proclivities of our species - it'll be beneficial to find like minded folks in terms of survival (if it comes to something that drastic) and then work together to accomplish it.

I ain't no tree hugger - but there's a necessity for trees . . . and balance. Our species is the first of it's kind to knock things off kilter this much (cuz there ain't no archeological evidence of anything else doin' it) and we're starting to see the consequences. (I'm not talkin' global warming - just the sheer volume of wasteful shit we produce.) 150 years of industrialization is a very short span of time compared to the millennia this planet has been around - and we're generally myopic enough not to see the long term impact of all we're doing.

This aberratioin in the Gulf is a result of our self-created need for fossil fuel. Maybe it can be a positive catalyst for change. Like it or not - change IS dictated to us in one way or another - either through the market (I can't buy TAB soda anymore!) or through legislation / regulation. (I can't afford to smoke either!)

I'd prefer the former . . .

Cuz maybe TAB wasn't that great anyway.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 15, 2010, 09:41:30 AM
"This aberratioin in the Gulf is a result of our self-created need for fossil fuel."
 
Please remember..if it wasn't for "fossil fuels" including coal, we would still be in the 18th/19th century. We use petrol type chemicals to make medicines, plastics and even the steel and specialty metals used in bicycles and surgical tools. I don't think it was SELF CREATING as much as a need to do a lot of things we do and have the things we have...today... even the internet *S*.
 
"change IS dictated to us in one way or another - either through the market (I can't buy TAB soda anymore!) or through legislation / regulation. (I can't afford to smoke either!)"
 
No TAB but other items in it's place. And legislation is one thing but it should come from an entitiy that we ELECT, not one appointed and makes LEGISLATION/regulation.... as in the EPA and DEP. There is a point at which we, as individuals, are responsible for OUR safety... We knew better than to smoke, drink to excess, drive recklessly and have dangerous hobbies like mountain climbing and sailing solo....yet we STILL do it....Maybe the Darwin Awards are the answer. Because people insist on living near a river, ocean, below sea level near a levy or on a muddy hill in California, why is it MY responsiblity to pay for their poor decisions... and they go back and rebuild or relocate there..AGAIN for WHAT??? a view????? We don't all benefit from those practices but..... We all do from the use of DINO JUICE and COAL. I have to think that some of this dangerous drilling was created by Rules and Regulations as to the use of SAFER locations to drill. Our Government (us, but not our choice anymore) is the biggest OWNER of public lands... about 1/3 of the USA is Government land. Hmmmm and now check WHERE. Most of the Government lands are areas where there is OIL, GOLD, URANIUM, and other public resources that we are NOT allowed to take out of the ground. ANWR, Bakken etc. and even when allowed, we are years from putting together paperwork and regulations to even pusue. Right now, a Nuclear Power Plant has been in the paperwork/permit stage for over a decade....not ONE damned brick has been set in place as yet and piles of paperwork to go. Regulation in this amount only tells me it is for job protection at best. SO you see, I don't believe our Government wants anything more than HIGHER prices for the fuels we use in order to rape us for the TAX they impose with some of our own people nodding their pathetic heads up and down like a bobblehead dog in the back window of a 57 Chevy.
 
Here is a good one.... I have lived in MY house almost 40 years(it is over 100 years old).... raised a family and now...NOW I have to have my home checked for LEAD before I can have work done on it or even sell it. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot???? I ain't having anymore snotbubble blowers and the ones I had knew not to eat paint chips. This crap came from the EPA....NON ELECTED. Am I angry??? You betcha I am. We are becoming mind numbed wimps who want Big Government to make life "fair" and take care of us "forever and ever". Well, One thing I can tell you..... TRUTH.... LIFE IS NOT FAIR!! So I do and say the things I do to nudge the train of thought to a more realistic level. Whether it happens or not..I won't stop.
IMHO

 
 
For a time - I thought dropping off the grid was the answer, but after some research and consideration, I've reached about that same conclusion. We're gonna sink or swim, and mostly toigether. Given the proclivities of our species - it'll be beneficial to find like minded folks in terms of survival (if it comes to something that drastic) and then work together to accomplish it.

I ain't no tree hugger - but there's a necessity for trees . . . and balance. Our species is the first of it's kind to knock things off kilter this much (cuz there ain't no archeological evidence of anything else doin' it) and we're starting to see the consequences. (I'm not talkin' global warming - just the sheer volume of wasteful shit we produce.) 150 years of industrialization is a very short span of time compared to the millennia this planet has been around - and we're generally myopic enough not to see the long term impact of all we're doing.

This aberratioin in the Gulf is a result of our self-created need for fossil fuel. Maybe it can be a positive catalyst for change. Like it or not - change IS dictated to us in one way or another - either through the market (I can't buy TAB soda anymore!) or through legislation / regulation. (I can't afford to smoke either!)

I'd prefer the former . . .

Cuz maybe TAB wasn't that great anyway.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 15, 2010, 11:11:01 AM
Quote
So I do and say the things I do to nudge the train of thought to a more realistic level.

Ain't nothin' wrong with that.

And I agree with the 18/19th century observation. Question is - with all these things that we've invented to rely on - our we ultimately hurting the ecosystem that brought us to the point of creating our 'grid system'? Will this require a scaling back - or a different energy focus? Are we going to drag our feet with regulation / bureaucracy standing in the way of innovation / action?

Sometimes I feel as though I'm on a raft in a stream. I can paddle against the current - but it's kinda futile - especially in the times the current is strong. What I've learned to do is paddle in the current. I can still steer - but the water still carries me inevitably downstream . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on June 15, 2010, 12:25:32 PM
I agree with your raft analogy there Life, I can do what I can and that's it. I have to work 40 hours a week to take care of my family, so I don't have a lot of extra tie to save the world LOL. Add to that the part time crap and I barely have time for my family. But they are well taken care of and that's my prime directive. Not spoiled, just comfortable. And my kids are being brought up right with 2 parents and in the Church 'cause quite honestly, if it weren't for my faith I would have given up long ago.
LifeTime: I consider myself a conservative environmentalist. I like to leave the land as it is for the enjoyment of everyone, but if you can build something on your own land without hurting the environment, well, have at it. I miss PA because of all the open woods and farmland...I get a bit claustrophobic in the big city but I haven't figured out how to work from a smartphone yet.
..and if the whole grid goes down, who gets the food? The people with the most firepower? I can't compete there and I imagine a lot of people on this forum couldn't either. There are a lot of MEAN immoral people out there and I just can't see building a stockade. I have a church full of able bodied men with strong families, I have to put my faith there. I will work as hard as I can but I can't become a militant. Don't get me wrong, I will protect my family but I just can't bring myself to 'Arm' myself to the teeth "just in case".
 
Depressing, huh? BP just needs to plug that hole. If only a small percentage of people that CAN use alternative transportation DO, we can put a huge dent in our dependency on oil...and maybe on the obesity problem as well.
 
I think I need to eat lunch, I feel sick....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on June 16, 2010, 10:12:19 AM
[url]http://sodafinder.com/products/tab[/url] ([url]http://sodafinder.com/products/tab[/url])
 
[url]http://www.drsoda.com/tab.html[/url] ([url]http://www.drsoda.com/tab.html[/url])

 
YES!! The Soda Finder site has Cherikee Red available! I hadn't had it since I was a little kid & hadn't been able to find it, so I thought they'd discontinued it. Discovered it being sold in the Wal-Mart in Conneaut Lake two years ago - now, every trip up, I buy a 12-pack, and I have to make it last the six months until the next trip. It's like a little bit of my childhood in a can (my husband doesn't see the appeal, but he's a native Floridian, so his taste is automatically suspect).
 
Sorry for the t/j...I was just excited there for a minute.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 16, 2010, 11:06:08 AM
One thing I always liked and was in Supermarkets in the Grove City Area was Mint Ginger ale. It was a Christmas Holiday Item. Cott's made the best and now that seems gone and a "Tom Tucker" makes something like it but not the same.
 
Cotts was good straight or mixed with adult beverages *S*
 
 
 
[url]http://sodafinder.com/products/tab[/url] ([url]http://sodafinder.com/products/tab[/url])
 
[url]http://www.drsoda.com/tab.html[/url] ([url]http://www.drsoda.com/tab.html[/url])

 
YES!! The Soda Finder site has Cherikee Red available! I hadn't had it since I was a little kid & hadn't been able to find it, so I thought they'd discontinued it. Discovered it being sold in the Wal-Mart in Conneaut Lake two years ago - now, every trip up, I buy a 12-pack, and I have to make it last the six months until the next trip. It's like a little bit of my childhood in a can (my husband doesn't see the appeal, but he's a native Floridian, so his taste is automatically suspect).
 
Sorry for the t/j...I was just excited there for a minute.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on June 16, 2010, 11:12:12 AM
Mint ginger ale? Maybe I'll have to look around for that - sounds like my kind of thing, since I love those funky Jones flavors and specialty sodas. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 16, 2010, 11:18:04 AM
Can find it but only around the winter holidays... Was a Hey Martha too with the "Herald" until they discontinued the forum. Found EE and so far..am happy, though some may not think so LOL. West PA is home and love riding my motorcycle from March through even Christmas or so if the roads are dry. Did a Wally World Christmas shopping trip on bike with a buddy... the looks LOL but only bought small items.
 
I went to those sites you posted... no Mint Ginger Ale at all. Oh well.
 
 
Mint ginger ale? Maybe I'll have to look around for that - sounds like my kind of thing, since I love those funky Jones flavors and specialty sodas.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on June 16, 2010, 01:57:05 PM
beanie: Have you tried the Winn Dixie brands? LOVE the strawberry....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on June 16, 2010, 02:24:20 PM
All Winn Dixies by me are nasteeeeee!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on June 16, 2010, 02:44:14 PM
Ditto on what NP says - the two Winn Dixie's close to me aren't the best. My family shops almost exclusively at Publix (being grocery snobs who totally fall for the sneaky marketing of every-other-week bogo sales).


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 16, 2010, 06:08:43 PM
I read that as 'bongo sales' and thought . . . "Hmph! Southern Beatniks!"

Back to topic.

Cap and Trade is coming. Not good.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on June 16, 2010, 06:11:03 PM
Oh, bongos are so last week. Now people are all about the VUVUZELA!  :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 17, 2010, 08:03:33 AM
Cap and Tax may not pass the Senate so they will cut and paste smaller parts of it to make it palatable...maybe. This all goes to Emanuel... "Never let a Crisis go to waste..." This is from the same administration that cries at conservatives for being "Knee Jerkers". C&T...if successful will only be the first part of the tsunami of legislation being prepared.... and in it's wake.... unemployment, entitlements and taxes/fees to go UP. How does your pocket feel now?
 
 
I read that as 'bongo sales' and thought . . . "Hmph! Southern Beatniks!"

Back to topic.

Cap and Trade is coming. Not good.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 18, 2010, 06:59:07 AM
An excellent article on the actions (or rather the perceived actons) of our President.

http://article.nationalreview.com/436145/the-very-model-of-a-modern-major-generalist/mark-steyn?page=1 (http://article.nationalreview.com/436145/the-very-model-of-a-modern-major-generalist/mark-steyn?page=1)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: OL FATTY on June 18, 2010, 03:01:25 PM
Winn Dixie's motto here in the sun state is..."Others may lick our weiners but you will never beat our meat".


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 19, 2010, 10:02:30 AM
   Why did Bernie Madoff go to prison?  To make it simple, he talked people into investing with him.  Trouble was, he didn't invest their money.  As time rolled on, he simply took the money from the new investors to pay off the old investors. Finally, there were too many old investors and not enough money from new investors coming in to keep the payments going.  Next thing you know, Madoff is one of the most hated men in America and he is off to jail.   Too few people realize this, but Madoff did to his investors what the government has been doing to us with Social Security. There is no meaningful difference between the two schemes. . . except that one was operated by a private individual who is now in jail, and the other is operated by politicians who enjoy perks, privileges and status in spite of their actions.   Do we need a side-by-side comparison here? Well here's a nifty little chart.  
   BERNIE MADOFF[/t][/t]
[/t][/t]   SOCIAL SECURITY
   Takes money from investors with the promise that the money will be invested and made available to them later.[/t]   Takes money from wage earners with the promise that the money will be invested in a "Trust Fund" and made available later.
   Instead of investing the money Madoff spends it on nice homes in the Hamptons and yachts.[/t]   Instead of keeping the money in a trust fund the politicians raid the fund and use it for general spending and vote-buying.
   When the time comes to pay the investors back Madoff simply uses some of the new funds from newer investors to pay back the older investors.[/t]   When benefits for older investors become due the politicians pay them with money taken from younger and newer wage earners to pay the geezers.
   When Madoff's scheme is discovered all hell breaks loose. New investors won't give him any more cash.[/t]   When Social Security runs out of money they simply force the taxpayers to send them some more.
   Bernie Madoff is in jail.[/t]   Politicians remain in Washington .     
[/td][/tr][/table]


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on June 19, 2010, 11:06:43 AM
An excellent article on the actions (or rather the perceived actons) of our President.

[url]http://article.nationalreview.com/436145/the-very-model-of-a-modern-major-generalist/mark-steyn?page=1[/url] ([url]http://article.nationalreview.com/436145/the-very-model-of-a-modern-major-generalist/mark-steyn?page=1[/url])


Thought the article was weak.  As technology continues to flatten the world, our citizenship in it will increase. Have you read The World Is Flat  I agree with Friedman, that is where we are all headed, but for the flag-waving far right, it is bad, disappointing news I am sure. (ie - when one's job is taken due to outsourcing abroad, or due to insourcing by UPS, or worse, your job in the US is dependent on being a liason between say, China and the US.... ) The world economy and social system will be vastly different in 100 years or so, all due to technology. Look how different it is from 100 years ago!  Not sure, personally, if this is ultimately good or bad, fulfilling prophecy or what.  But definitely where the world is headed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on June 20, 2010, 12:16:57 AM
LifeFOL:  Here is the video of Tom Friedman at MIT. Very interesting and worth your time to watch.
http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/266 (http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/266)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 20, 2010, 08:21:30 AM
You never read Friedman's book?! I bought it and read it years ago because you recommended it on the Hey Martha Forums!

It was interesting - but not exactly riveting. My wife enjoyed it more than I did.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: gore range on June 20, 2010, 01:14:35 PM
....Friedman's overall hypothesis is by no means certain and he address such in his book; certainly the trend is headed in that direction particularity given the incredibly evolving communication technologies and billionth of a second movements of profits/currencies across the Ethernet surface of the ever less arching globe....

....however, in addition to Tom noting the parallel between his ever-flattening (but still wrinkled)  global business world and Marxism, and the inherent resistance to such which even he notes will keep some wanted and necessary limits on the flatness of the coming new world, Tom does little to incorporate the realities of entire other geo-political entities and their impact....

.... such as, for one,  most of Thomas P.M.  Barnett's  global  Functioning Core/Non-Integrating Gap  observations, and the costly impact of such on the developing/interlocking world; where, he notes it needs to be the military that offers partnerships/support in the Non-Integrating Gap countries to provided the necessary geo/political stability which will only then will allow them to join the global Functioning Core of  Friedman'  undulating world ....

....having spent more time in years now in the rear view mirror in Non-Integrating Gap countries I tend to lean more on Barnett than Friedman in endeavoring to track the  light-speed evolving onion-layered global jigsaw puzzle paradigms....

....on the other hand-


....I'm getting 12 AA batteries from China in 4 days for less than 3 bucks; that ain't a flat world-

....that's a worm hole through the core of the planet; from a former Non-Integrated Gap country where the military stabilized the economic/social turmoil-

.... and China will likely soon be the new world power if it doesn't implode due to the historically-rooted corruption culture, hopefully working within Friedman's desired flat world goals....

....of course, China spends more (of our) capital in the Non-Integrated Gap than any other nation endeavoring to partnership a stable reality in their backwater environs; Barnett in action ....

....if the old man (a George Patton/7th Army vet) lived to witness any of it he would have likely  thought he'd slipped into advanced dementia....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on June 20, 2010, 03:50:32 PM
I was reading his column faithfully back within the time frame of that book and I have read some other books. I figured that most of it was covered in the columns but surprise, it wasn't. And an updated version of the book has come out. He is quite prolific, a VERY good thinker.

Having dabbled in virtual employment and followed the global financial compliance market for a few while I worked for the crazy lady in California, I believe that Friedman is pretty much right on with his observations and predictions for the future flat world.  My thoughts regarding Life's original post is that as our INDIVIDUAL economic survival will grow to depend more and more on foreign countries (ie people), our nationalism won't fade but take on a new perspective.  Something akin to how the racial tensions of the past are slowly (very slowly) fading. (Did you know that interracial marriages are at an all time high in the US?) That someone calls the US "home" even tho they are a citizen of the world won't be viewed as unusual.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: gore range on June 20, 2010, 08:32:25 PM
....he is a good thinker; but then he's academically schooled in  international matters, with a solid first-hand death-defying grounding living in, eyes-on observation of, and writing of his learned perspectives regarding the situations in numerous major hot spots over the years....

....he's not always correct, but his batting average is notably higher than any other correspondent/author that I can think of, and he has been an enlightening/revealing window on numerous international matters over the decades, not to over look that he writes for the everyday reader.....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on June 22, 2010, 01:22:18 AM
In the 80's there was the "stop the world I wanna get off" view that change was happening too fast and that some didn't want to cope adapt, or couldn't.
Today those changes are coming even faster. It seems that some want to isolate themselves from it. Turn back the clock to a kinder gentler time.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on June 22, 2010, 08:27:27 AM
The thing is, if you listen to sociologists, that "kinder gentler time" is more of a cultural illusion.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 22, 2010, 09:46:54 AM
Agreed. Our species' history is rife with not so kind and gentle things. We see more of it now thanks to improvements we've made in communications. You'd think that'd make us strive a little harder to try and improve our individual character and pass that on.

You know - bein' the change you want to see in the world and that . . .

Question is - how does it come about? I've always been a bigger fan of attraction over promotion - though some might say that's too damn slow. Attraction allows for choice - whereas promotion is another thing entirely.

Humans are interesting creatures. Although sometimes reactions in certain personality types are quite predictable: 

Case in point - apparently General McChrystal ain't no sycophant and his assessment of the folks he works with doesn't sit well with 'em. Public criticisms of one's bosses is never a good idea. Bad reflection on him. Knee jerk public dress down for said criticsm - even worse idea.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on June 22, 2010, 03:44:23 PM
Why would someone in the military, a General, not say, a jarhead, WANT to be interviewed by Rolling Stone magazine?? That's the part I don't get...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 22, 2010, 05:21:49 PM
I'm curious to see how this plays out.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: gore range on June 22, 2010, 06:50:43 PM
....it's not an interview in any sense of the term-

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236?RS_show_page=0 (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236?RS_show_page=0)

....Hastings spent aprx a solid month tagging along in the General's staff's shadow, and it's obvious from the article there never was any interview, with the article being nothing more than a series of vignettes observed by Hastings over his time as a fly on the walls of the General's staff....

....it is interesting that the General's staff agreed to permit Hastings to tag along observing the inner circle often blue-water-sailor vocabulary-laced, particularly so as Hastings is on record of being at odds of the General's previous policies in Iraq and the SW Asian war effort over all....

....there is definitely some behind the scenes maneuvering going on, and it will be interesting not only to see if the maverick General survives professionally, but the effect on the overall war as well....

....me suspects the General will fit rather prominently in Secretary Clinton's 2012 campaign....




Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on June 22, 2010, 11:00:09 PM
....fascinating......  :)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on June 22, 2010, 11:37:24 PM
The thing is, if you listen to sociologists, that "kinder gentler time" is more of a cultural illusion.

Absolutely.

The question for many to resolve is not so much how they will adapt to what will be a facinating next 50-60 years, but how to prepare their children to not only adapt, but embrace the future, and to give them the tools/skills/experience to allow them the opportunity to prosper.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on June 22, 2010, 11:40:31 PM
....it's not an interview in any sense of the term-


I imagine when Gates first got wind of this his first move was to reach for the aspirin


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on June 23, 2010, 07:42:23 AM
Don't we all view our favorite times - our best years - as a kinder, gentler time?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on June 23, 2010, 07:58:07 AM
Ever read Freakonomics? There are some interesting observations in there about society as a whole and how things are far more gentler now than they have ever been.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on June 23, 2010, 08:21:17 AM
Quote
The question for many to resolve is not so much how they will adapt to what will be a facinating next 50-60 years, but how to prepare their children to not only adapt, but embrace the future, and to give them the tools/skills/experience to allow them the opportunity to prosper.

I am trying to do that with my kids. It's odd though: Do I promote new technology or teach them survival skills? I am trying to impart flexibility though, but at their age they need stability.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 23, 2010, 08:56:31 AM
Critical Thinking / Problem Solving. Those are adaptable to both areas. We're into teaching the kids how to ask questions and alter their perspective to approach things from different angles. (Focusing more on what some might call a 'classical' education.)

Historically, problem solving has been our species' strong suit . . . I'm hoping it remains so . . . . 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on June 23, 2010, 09:13:49 AM
: Political Shifty : Foamy The Squirrel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-npsvJ1esLI#)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on June 23, 2010, 12:19:38 PM
spot on life. I teach my kids to 'look around, the closest exit may be right behind you'... or something to that effect.
 
Maybe Kimmi can help us virtually school our kids...  ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 23, 2010, 06:01:00 PM
I'm amused by the headlines today about McChrystal and Obama. It's the insinuated meaning behind the words chosen . . . for example:

From the Christian Science Monitor: "In replacing McChrystal with Gen. David Petraeus, Obama reasserts authority " The reportable FACT is that Obama replaced McChrystal with Petraeus - the rest is supposition, but I have to wonder how savvy folks (not the folk son here - cuz ya'll are a smart bunch) really are when it comes to critical thinking about what they read.

Because we don't get what happened anymore - we get what happened, what they think the causes are, and what this is likely to mean - 2/3 of which is often supposition on the part of the author.

CNN: "McChrystal incident a 'learning moment'" -

*sigh*

I hope so . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on June 23, 2010, 06:27:53 PM
Well, everything can be taken as a "learning experience", but in this case, I expect *someone* certainly learned *something*, but the who and the what.... :-X


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on June 23, 2010, 07:57:28 PM
Well we certainly all learned the Afghani's were real happy about Petraeus. The whole politics thing is odd. As I recall Petraeus was under the Democratic microscope under the Bush administration and came up rather frequently on the political "analysis" news. McChrystal was a senior officer under Bush as well. Though he was not as well know as Petraeus he was still on the political radar since he served on the Joint chiefs.
McChrystal was hired by Obama after he fired McKiernan about a year ago. Of course he then embarrassed a number of high ranking officials with some colorfull comments and well, the rest is history.

What's really interesting is how little foreign policy really changes from one administration to the next. Sure the mechanics and strategies shift a little but the end goal is the same. The only thing that seems to change is taxes and social programs. The rest sometimes seems to be a bit more than but a wobble in our path. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on June 23, 2010, 11:17:33 PM
Don't we all view our favorite times - our best years - as a kinder, gentler time?

sure, then as you mature , you realize that it's never easy. Ask your parents. I think thats when Mom & Dad know their kid is starting to appreciate what they went thru.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on June 23, 2010, 11:20:18 PM
Ever read Freakonomics? There are some interesting observations in there about society as a whole and how things are far more gentler now than they have ever been.

Growing up I remember the unusual quiet at the dinner table the day it was learned another kid from the hood got polio.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on June 23, 2010, 11:23:02 PM
Critical Thinking / Problem Solving. Those are adaptable to both areas. We're into teaching the kids how to ask questions and alter their perspective to approach things from different angles. (Focusing more on what some might call a 'classical' education.)

Historically, problem solving has been our species' strong suit . . . I'm hoping it remains so . . . . 

Thats what ya have to doLife. Stress a second language too. Thats a skill that I think is going to be required for success.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 24, 2010, 07:17:20 AM
Actually - I think we're going to work on Latin. It's the root of the romance languages, medical terms are latin, as are legal ones. (If they ever went to a Catholic Mass I imagine it'd be helpful too.)

It'll be a good jumping off point.

It's one thing to provide 'facts' and quite another to train the mind. I think a sound education has far more to do with the latter.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on June 24, 2010, 07:48:52 AM
Learning facts is good, however one must learn how to apply these facts. I have to deal with offshore people daily. They know facts and have them drilled into their head. The know that a hammer will drive a nail into a board and that when the nail crosses through two or more pieces of wood they become secured together. Unfortunately they neither know how to grasp a hammer or swing a hammer. This isn't a fault of them genetically or a result of them being less intelligent. It's a result of not being taught how to think.

Speaking of offshore and outsourcing, what happened to all the wonderful jobs we have been promised? Jobs are appearing, but most are service industry jobs and other minimum wage or other low paying jobs. We have a lot of unemployed skilled people sitting around watching their skills deteriorate while jobs continue to be shipped overseas.

Yes, it's a global economy but I though the position of the Government was to lead the third world, not to join it. That sentence was directed at ever administration since 1976 by the way,.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on June 24, 2010, 08:33:05 AM
Critical Thinking / Problem Solving. Those are adaptable to both areas. We're into teaching the kids how to ask questions and alter their perspective to approach things from different angles. (Focusing more on what some might call a 'classical' education.)

Historically, problem solving has been our species' strong suit . . . I'm hoping it remains so . . . . 

Thats what ya have to do Life. Stress a second language too. Thats a skill that I think is going to be required for success.

My choices in high school were Spanish and German.  German for cryin' out loud.  I did the Spanish thing.  My son is taking Mandarin.  When we went to ChinaTown in NYC my husband told our waitress (son unknowing) he was learning so she came over and asked him how he was enjoying his visit (in Mandarin)  and he hesitated a second and was able to answer her....not so smoothly, but correctly and was quite pleased to have a real life experience.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on June 25, 2010, 12:07:00 AM
The next 50 yrs will see the emergence of China, India, Russia and Brazil as economic giants. Skill in those languages (Brazil=Portuguese) would be in demand. Of course Spanish, since they are our natural trading partners. 
Answer.com says 1.4billion people speak Mandarin. So thats a good choice.
Here's a factoid. There are more English speaking people in China than in the U.S.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on June 25, 2010, 07:31:16 AM
But if I remember correctly, it is standard that ALL of the children there learn English in school. Been so for quite some time.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on June 25, 2010, 09:46:56 AM
English teachers in China are in pretty high demand, and most young Chinese want very much to learn to speak English (especially in the larger cities where they may be seeking jobs with international corporations or want to get student visas). I have a friend who has lived over there twice as a teacher (actually, I just found out that he's gone back for a third time, and is currently in Hong Kong - he has to relay messages through friends at times because the "Great Firewall" blocks his access to most of the internet). My favorite picture that he sent was of the Starbucks at the Great Wall. And there were many pictures of the fashionable young Chinese chainsmoking *everywhere* - including inside the KFC; he says it felt like being in the US about 20-25 years ago. But then he'd have pictures of the roadside food vendors selling (identified) meat on a stick and barbecued chicken feet.
 
Locally, I see a lot of industries that rely on certain types of business (insurance, personal injury law, etc.) seeking bilingual employees, Spanish-speaking probably being the most useful in central and south Florida. French used to be the "international language", but more and more it looks like English is becoming the common language on a global scale.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on June 25, 2010, 11:16:39 PM
But if I remember correctly, it is standard that ALL of the children there learn English in school. Been so for quite some time.

True. Same for Germany. Probably other countries too. Thats the competition for jobs of the future. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on June 26, 2010, 08:42:17 AM
It would be nice if it was required in the US.  :rant:

I still have to dumb down my vocabulary when talking to professionals. Don't get me started on the 'youth of today'.
Is it required in AZ?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 28, 2010, 05:43:11 PM
Joe Biden - super genius. I like the way that rolls off the tongue. Joe Biden soooper geeenyus!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/27/biden-calls-custard-shop-manager-smartass-taxes-comment/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/27/biden-calls-custard-shop-manager-smartass-taxes-comment/)

My God - the man is one heartbeat away from the Presidency . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on June 28, 2010, 06:53:53 PM
And Nancy it two away.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on June 30, 2010, 07:17:22 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/29/congressman-says-borders-secure/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/29/congressman-says-borders-secure/)

Representative Pete Stark - utter f***ing tool.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on June 30, 2010, 08:01:32 PM
I agree.... maybe he should be taken to the most desolate part of our southern border by a "Minute Man or Woman...."   ;)
 
 
[url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/29/congressman-says-borders-secure/[/url] ([url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/29/congressman-says-borders-secure/[/url])

Representative Pete Stark - utter f***ing tool.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 06, 2010, 03:22:48 PM
From the Declaration of Independence - one of the problems they had with King George (and his governance):

"He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them."

So - do you think this issue the Feds have with the Arizona Immigration Law is kinda similar? I mean - if the Feds would enforce current immigration law - Arizona wouldn;t have done what they've daone.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070601928.html?hpid=topnews (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070601928.html?hpid=topnews)



Curiouser and curiouser . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 06, 2010, 11:15:39 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070602133_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010070605201 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070602133_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010070605201)

So President Obama derided the Supreme Court in public during his State of the Union Address for allowing corporate ads / donations to campaigns, yet the groups outspending EVERYONE on political ads are the Unions. And what Union leads the way? Why the SEIU of course . . .

And who has been the most frequent visitor to the White House since this President has taken office? Why Andy Stern! President of the SEIU.

Hmph.

No conflict of interest there - right?

I'm surprised the Post even bothered to report it . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on July 07, 2010, 12:09:04 AM
Don't forget those foreign corporations buying up the supply of Congressional bobble-head dolls!! ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on July 08, 2010, 07:35:46 AM
...she couldn't "say for sure that they were illegal, but it is obvious to me that they were from Central America."  (http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgovernment/oldsmar-official-wants-arizona-like-rules-against-hiring-illegal-immigrants/1107550)

 ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on July 08, 2010, 03:29:42 PM
If the Supreme Court had ruled the other way, unions would have been restricted just like the corporations.
[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070602133_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010070605201[/url] ([url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/06/AR2010070602133_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010070605201[/url])

So President Obama derided the Supreme Court in public during his State of the Union Address for allowing corporate ads / donations to campaigns, yet the groups outspending EVERYONE on political ads are the Unions. And what Union leads the way? Why the SEIU of course . . .

And who has been the most frequent visitor to the White House since this President has taken office? Why Andy Stern! President of the SEIU.

Hmph.

No conflict of interest there - right?

I'm surprised the Post even bothered to report it . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 08, 2010, 03:52:36 PM
Exactly. There's a lot of double standards present based on "sides of the aisle." Quite frankly - I think ethical issues shouldn't be limited to sides or party . . . but each side wants to portray itself as being morally superior to the other when they're both equally corrupt.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 09, 2010, 09:39:55 AM
Do yu REALLY think we should be sitting down and talking to these folks? Seems that reasoning with the unreasonable may be kind of futile . . . don't you think?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/08/iran-death-stoning-adultery (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/08/iran-death-stoning-adultery)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 09, 2010, 10:52:08 AM
Out of Morbid curiosity, I went online to see what types of punishment comes from this Religion of Peace. I found videos of stonings... Women buried to their breasts before the stoning began, men are buried to their waist. I saw machines used to "crush off" 4 fingers on a hand and even the removal of an eye while the convicted was awake. Yes.... death by injection is cruel and unusual???
 
My Father was OLD COUNTRY GREEK...and he always told me when I was a child, and... in broken English/Greek..."You no trust Mussilman." For a man borne in Jan of 1892 and a 3rd grade level education..... I think he was smarter than I thought.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on July 10, 2010, 09:37:49 PM
While I would have liked for there to have been a hearing on this nomination, these recess appointments are nothing new.

That author didn't fully quote this guy so you have to wonder what else is he misinforming us about. 

The full quote is "The decision is not whether or not we will ration care; the decision is  whether we will ration with our eyes open. And right now, we are doing  it blindly."


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 11, 2010, 10:35:12 AM
Here is what I hate about all this crap.... I could give a flying fudge about what OTHER people did..... In case we have forgotten.... was it or was it not... THE CHANGE??? They emphatically said there would be "TRANSPARENCY". His right to appoint, yes.... but isn't this the same ol' shit but different day? ??? I am not the sharpest tack in the pack but if it smells like skunk.... it usually is. I will also say...if people don't take the time to find and fully read anything but take their lead from sound bites... they get the Government they deserve. My old saying is..." don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining ". As far as I am concerned... I have smelled a painted skunk since Jan 20, 2009 and before. You have your opinions and I have mine....
 
 
While I would have liked for there to have been a hearing on this nomination, these recess appointments are nothing new.

That author didn't fully quote this guy so you have to wonder what else is he misinforming us about. 

The full quote is "The decision is not whether or not we will ration care; the decision is  whether we will ration with our eyes open. And right now, we are doing  it blindly."


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 11, 2010, 07:40:05 PM
Well that is what I would say.... what follows is a different matter altogether...  ;) 
 
While I would have liked for there to have been a hearing on this nomination, these recess appointments are nothing new.

That author didn't fully quote this guy so you have to wonder what else is he misinforming us about. 

The full quote is "The decision is not whether or not we will ration care; the decision is  whether we will ration with our eyes open. And right now, we are doing  it blindly." 

We can agree...that there should have been...a hearing...just because it is not something new...does not make it right...I am amazed that...is what you got out of that story...read up a little on...Dr. Berwick...again a very interesting person...here is another person that scares me...and should scare many many others...IMO...but then I am not...into...re-distribute of wealth...socialized medicine...health care rationing...or the Obama administration...JMO...and this author as many others...did the same quote...in which the last part...was left out...and I do not see where that made a difference...again...JMO... ;) ...
 
 
Lifetime...why would you let some one Piss...on your leg... ??? ... :D ...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 15, 2010, 05:45:11 PM
A sticking point, for even the Dems, was that there will be NO federally funded abortions ( save certain circumstances ) Rape...adultry... etc. Below is a site from PA. Basically now money can fund abortions that are "legal" in PA. ?????
 
And.... New Mexico has money set aside for.... "elective abortions". It is put in a High Risk fund set aside with millions of dollars. Now you know I am not on an abortion roller coaster. MY POINT.... didn't Bam Bam call people liars who said that this new health bill will NOT allow or PAY for abortions???? An executive order even put that in print. Ahhhhh and who voted for this Health bill??? Dahlkemper.... Sestak...... With this in mind..... anyone who is vehemently AGAINST abortion has just been shown who NOT to vote for. If you vote FOR them..... your integrity is at risk. I have my options..... you don't. Find out who voted for the Health Bill and do what you should.
 
All I can say is this..... inform those who profess to be ANTI ABORTION and who does not want tax money to be used for ABORTION BIRTH CONTROL. I am saying this so that my friends who say they don't want this..... follow through, as well as those they know who feels the same way as them. Politics is a BLOOD SPORT.... Who's blood..... well that could be up to you.
 
 
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pennsylvania-insurance-dept.-evades-questions-on-federal-abortion-coverage/ (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pennsylvania-insurance-dept.-evades-questions-on-federal-abortion-coverage/)
 
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjRiNTU0ZjU1NmY0ZDZiZjJhY2UxYWM5N2U1YjJmZjk (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjRiNTU0ZjU1NmY0ZDZiZjJhY2UxYWM5N2U1YjJmZjk)=
 
http://www.lifenews.com/nat6540.html (http://www.lifenews.com/nat6540.html)
 
Please don't kill the messenger
 
 
Pick this apart if you want......


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on July 15, 2010, 10:38:57 PM
Goldman agreed to pay a $550M fine for as they claim doing nothing wrong.
 
"
Goldman acknowledged Thursday that its marketing materials for the deal at the center of the charges omitted key information for buyers.
But the firm did not admit legal wrongdoing.
In a statement, Goldman said "it was a mistake" for the marketing materials to leave out that a Goldman client helped craft the portfolio and that the client's financial interests ran counter to those of investors."
 
Because of that mistake, a group of Goldman investors lost $1B.
Corporate ethics is not what it used to be!!



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on July 17, 2010, 10:54:56 AM
An interesting website.
 
Tired of Illegals taking away American jobs? Click Here! (http://takeourjobs.org/)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 17, 2010, 11:16:58 AM
Personally I think a greater concern is the outsourcing of our higher end jobs to other countries. At least the illegals are spending the money here and putting it back into the pockets of the people here. When jobs get outsourced people are unemployed and the monies spent on outsourcing jobs stay in that country. There are literally hundreds of thousands of jobs occupied by former-American workers all over the world.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on July 17, 2010, 11:34:40 AM
Nice point NP.  I've read a little bit about this lately......seems this is something that is getting more and more attention as of late.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 17, 2010, 03:11:46 PM
Not sure I agree with you on some of this.... I know illegals fill houses with 15-20 workers.... I think most of the money is NOT spent here but sent back to Mexico or where ever... And I still don't like that their kids use our school systems and the Hospitals are flooded...Hmmmm who pays that?
 
Our "HIGH END" jobs went overseas as an economic problem.... why pay $20/hour and benefite when it can be done and shipped back for less..... AND WE BUY this stuff. So....who is a big part of this problem??? Hmmmm could it be us as consumers???? Just MO.
 
 
Personally I think a greater concern is the outsourcing of our higher end jobs to other countries. At least the illegals are spending the money here and putting it back into the pockets of the people here. When jobs get outsourced people are unemployed and the monies spent on outsourcing jobs stay in that country. There are literally hundreds of thousands of jobs occupied by former-American workers all over the world.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 17, 2010, 04:18:38 PM
I'm not saying that any of it it right. However consider this. We have a skilled work force that is sitting around on their but watching their skills deteriorate. This inclusive of IT, engineers, skilled trades, etc. Many of these jobs produce no tangible product that we consume via purchase at a store. Many of our Fortune 500 companies outsource their IT and engineering activities to third world countries such as India, Malaysia, Tiawan and so on. This is true for manufacturing a well. Let's say we had an incident at a major power plant and some of the uber-large transformers were damaged beyond repair. We have to go off shore to get one as they aren't made here any more.

Many of our largest companies have infrastructures that are managed offshore. Ever see what happens when a fiber cut under the ocean floor happens and there is a crisis and there's nobody to fix it? It's ugly. What if that country came under attack? We as a country would be in deep doo-doo. Our jobs are going offshore and nobody wants to do the menial tasks the immigrants do because it's beneath them. I'd like to think that my kids will be able to actually get a job that doesn't involve passing food in a bag through a window when they get out of college. The outlook at the moment is not so good.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on July 17, 2010, 07:19:38 PM
An interesting website.
 
Tired of Illegals taking away American jobs? Click Here! ([url]http://takeourjobs.org/[/url])
If the wages of the farm workers were allowed to be determined by the so-called "free market" and that labor "market" was limited to AMERICANS, which is only common sense, I'm betting you would get Americans to do those jobs, albeit at higher wages.  But the free market zealots, e.g., Republicans, would never stand for that!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 17, 2010, 07:43:03 PM
How is this a republican problem? It's a problem that has been around for decades through both parties (okay, there should be more mentioned) and nothing has really been done about it. Mostly when times were good Americans didn't wantto pick lettuce or run around with a leaf blower. Yes, I stereotyping, but to make a point. If you could go out and but your ass in the fields for $8.25 and hour or get $255 a week unemployment, which would you do? The money is about the same.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on July 17, 2010, 08:19:30 PM
I'm not saying it's a Republican problem.  It's just that the people out there spouting off about the free market these days are primarily Republicans. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 18, 2010, 08:39:44 AM
LOL I bet the only ones who are NOT LAID OFF are Republicans? Hey.... believe what you want but I see this as almost grail.... Americans ...most of the time will take the less expensive way out when quality is about on par, TOO many...given money for NOT doing anything ...will continue to do just that. And th POOR and the HOMELESS are not always THAT. It is what is preceived, not what is actually. IMHO


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on July 18, 2010, 10:09:44 AM
Personally I think a greater concern is the outsourcing of our higher end jobs to other countries. At least the illegals are spending the money here and putting it back into the pockets of the people here. When jobs get outsourced people are unemployed and the monies spent on outsourcing jobs stay in that country. There are literally hundreds of thousands of jobs occupied by former-American workers all over the world.

Yes, much of the money is sent "home" to help support the parents or siblings of the ones who made it here safely. I knew a guy in LA who worked two full time jobs (one in a liquor store, and one in a grocery store as a bagger/stockperson) and sent the money to his family. I don't know if he was legal here or not. Of course he paid rent, all the basics, but you have to admire his resolve to help his family while living on the minimum every day of his life. That's the kind of character that you just don't see in "legal" Americans who think it's their job to be a lifetime welfare recipient.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on July 18, 2010, 10:19:03 AM
I'd like to think that my kids will be able to actually get a job that doesn't involve passing food in a bag through a window when they get out of college. The outlook at the moment is not so good.

Tell your children to study foreign languages while in school or college, or get them Cds to study on their own. And not just Spanish or French like they offer in public school. Learning another language can open up a world of opportunities.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 18, 2010, 04:38:25 PM
Ok folks...the Old Man's take.... I laugh when we are told to tell our children to learn another language. Here is what I see and it hasn't really changed that much.. .. English is STILL the language of business. It is the MONEY/INDUSTRY language. Technology to Airlines. I took language in School... Latin.... other than an occasional word... it is dead. I have a son who took 2 years of Spanish and a wife who took 1 year.... My son is in law enforcement and rarely has a need this far north to use it...either vocally or on paper. I know enough spanish ( Puerto Rican) that I learned in the service that amounts to name calling and the sexual preference of their parents.
 
First...here is what I see that we need to do..... Make our kids actually learn and speak ENGLISH FIRST. Have any of you actually listened to your kids/Grand kids? ??? ? My English teachers would have smacked me in the head for going into a workforce with their use and application of this language. Half can't even write.... prove it ..ask them to hand write a letter.... I am barely into any college credits in my education and I had to rewrite some of my son's and sister-in-laws college papers. Spelling is shot, structure is iffy and this is even on resumes.
 
Second.... I laugh at their math skills. Try this... in a store your bill is $1.85 and you hand the clerk $2.10.... if the machine doesn't tell them they need to give you a quarter...they freak. SOme can't make change unless a machine tells them.
 
After I graduated and became a young adult... the DIGITAL AGE came in. Clocks clicked numbers and only a few actually had moving hands... kids had trouble telling time. Even my Granddaughter went blank when I asked her to read a rotary dial clock with NO NUMBERS!
 
It isn't the foreign language that is more important in getting a good job. It is grasping the basic tools and using them. 2+2 is 4 in every language.... Lief is two kewl to waist iph yo don't no the basiks. ROTFLMFAO... hmmmm


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 18, 2010, 07:31:55 PM
There's nothing wrong with learning a second language. But one should to be proficient in their mother tongue. Both my munchkins are pretty articulate for their age. That being said I agree with you though. Them misuse of the language can get rather deplorable at times. My kids can tell time on analog clock. The six year old has to think about it a bit though.

I honestly don't know what they will do. They will know how to cook, clean, do laundry and have better than basic living skills before they get sent on their way. They'll also have some computer skills as well ;)

I just hope they turn out to be the adults I hope I raised them to be.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 19, 2010, 08:45:12 AM
People think that "good jobs" can only be gotten from a college education. SOOOOO wrong.... Please notice that jobs that "required" 2 years of college, now wnat 4 or more and they don't pay anymore. Some vocations want college in the applicants...but the degree can be in anything as long as there is a sheepskin...WHAT???
 
Here is the trend I am seeing.... those willing to do training in the skills of the hands will be the ones who will have a good income. Call a plumber, auto mechanic, electrician, carpenter, appliance repair..... Even the best trained Doctor needs them and will pay good money for them. The reason I am saying this is..... we are at a phase in our economics at which we will try to make large cost items last longer. So.... sometimes the suit and tie is better traded for a uniform and tools. Now, that being said.... Languages in that, needed not so much....but being able to speak proper English, is what is needed. I am a firm believer.... if you want to come to America and live.... learn the language, don't make me learn yours. Nothing in the Greatest documents of our Country was written or read in anything but English.... Constitution, Bill of Rights, Gettysburg Address, even "I had a Dream". These were for ALL but.... in ENGLISH. Now.... if your ambition is to work in another country.... have at it. If you want to work for a foreign company that has offices here or even a language teacher... sounds like a plan. Even foreign companies who do come here to set up shop, have employees learn English. Even the Family head of TOYOTA had knowledge of English when he sat in the hotseat of  our Congress.
 
 
There's nothing wrong with learning a second language. But one should to be proficient in their mother tongue. Both my munchkins are pretty articulate for their age. That being said I agree with you though. Them misuse of the language can get rather deplorable at times. My kids can tell time on analog clock. The six year old has to think about it a bit though.

I honestly don't know what they will do. They will know how to cook, clean, do laundry and have better than basic living skills before they get sent on their way. They'll also have some computer skills as well ;)

I just hope they turn out to be the adults I hope I raised them to be.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 19, 2010, 09:07:20 AM
One does not have to graduate college to get a good job. College is useful in that is provides you with a set of tools prior to entering the workforce. Then it's OJT for most occupations anyhow, including those that would prefer a college degree. Most use the terms "college degree or commensurate experience" in the job descriptions. The richest man in the US attended, but did not graduate from college.

I don't think I'd want a Doctor diagnosing me,  performing surgery that had not gone to medical school though.

Yes, English is a required subject in most countries. In fact in India it is that national language. Mainly because they have so many languages (38+) there needed some common means of communication. The Brits gave them that. Still, there's nothing wrong with learning a second language if for nothing else to exercise my noggin.  If my job required me to travel to a non-english speaking country for a three year stint I'd be learning the local language as fast as I could. Im sure I'd run into a lot of english speaking people there, but not learning the local language would place me at a distinct disadvantage.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on July 19, 2010, 09:33:09 AM
My two cents:
 
On the issue of "illegals"...can anyone tell me, just from looking at someone, if they can tell who is a "legal" citizen? Or is this just an assumption made most often based on skin color and primary language? A large portion of my neighborhood is Hispanic, all speak Spanish amongst each other and are most comfortable in their first language, but will speak English when it is necessary. Most of them are Cuban, and being more than one generation removed, are US citizens. They have jobs and own their homes. Most keep their properties up, and are respectful of the neighbors (more so than some of the non-Hispanic neighbors, that's for sure). But they live in a country that treats them with suspicion and enacts laws that  would potentially require them to *prove* their citizenship in ways that others would not, just because someone might assume they could be Mexican. Because when we're talking about "illegal immigrants", that's what most people mean, but just won't say outright. I've seen more Eastern Europeans with lapsed student visas, and Southeast Asians who have asylum but not citizenship, to know that until there are solid statistics on exactly how much "illegal immigrants" actually cost the tax payer, and broken down by region or country of origin,  versus how much legal citizens cost the same government programs, this is all just more political hyperbole to me.
 
On the subject of a college degree: college recruiters will tell you that, depending on the sector you're planning on pursuing work in, a Bachelors degree is the new high school diploma. My sister-in-law just graduated, and has been working at a local wing franchise for years, and is thinking about looking for another job, but hasn't had any luck (because she has no experience in the field she was thinking of - just thinks that she should be able to step into a sales job because she's "hot"). Now all of a sudden, someone else working at the same place without the degree is inferior to her. I asked her "So, you spent all this money, have all these outstanding student loans, for this degree...and you're here. She doesn't, and has the same job. The only thing separating you is that piece of paper and the debt that came with it. Who's the smart one again?" Now she's talking about pursuing her Masters (in what she can't really say). I have a friend pursuing her MLS - lives at home, no job, because she only wants a job that relates to her major (was on unemployment for a while, as well), and is meanwhile racking up loan debt to the point that she's not sure she'll ever make enough to be pay off in order to get her life to where she wants it. And these are just people I know - I see these kinds of scenarios every single day in the students around me. I have been looking for a job out of state, and I can find jobs that have as much emphasis on experience and background as on education, because those candidates require less training, potentially, and cut down on the cost the the employer. But down here, all I see is degree, degree, degree. I work for a university, and they are listing Bachelors degrees as "preferred" qualifications for low staff positions that barely grade above receptionist, and are offering annual salaries in the low 20's...but that's what they value, and we've got a whole bunch of educated people here with amazingly low skill levels. I have a coworker who has two undergrad degrees, and has worked here over seven years, but can't even do the most basic functions in MS Excel. Which is a fundamental part of the job the staff on her level is supposed to do! It's mind-boggling.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 19, 2010, 09:58:06 AM
Interesting, I am (obviously) in the IT business. I have worked with people having educations ranging from 6th grade (yes, really) to people with multiple doctorates. Is there a correlating factor to education and capability? Yes and no. The educated are better equipped to see things out of the gate. After about a year or so on the job things start to even out and the people that are motivated start to shine. A degree means that you spent time in a classroom, passed tests and got a piece of paper that may or may not useful in you soon-to-be life in the real world.

What is interesting to note is that due to the influx of technology into many items (especially automobile repair and the tooling business) a fair number of trades are requiring computer skills as part of the OJT program. The playing field is definitely levelling out between many chosen occupations.

I think what irks me the most is how little companies spend on useful training for the employees.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 19, 2010, 10:57:21 AM
Part one.... just to look at anyone tells you nothing... but.... now let that person do something wrong and the constabulary or even social program initiators get involved... if done the right way...can fish them out. In all ....it is documentation and no...don't Bullshirt me with we all don't "need steeenking papers". EVERYONE needs paper of somesort to show they are in the system, from showing your drivers license and registration to me showing my VA card to be able to get my services. Try getting a job with out papers... are you a veteran? SSN number... valid address and phone number??? Even more. And this is expected FROM a HOME GROWN AMERICAN.
 
On degrees again....2 of my former jobs come to mind... I worked in a laboratory of a local Steel Mill. I prepared samples and ran tests for various levels of chemical makeup. No college required... I left for my last Green Machine stint and came back... the job now required a degree in Chemical Engineering DOHHHHH!!!! same job..different requirements.
 
My last job I worked at.... I had people with Masters and various degrees in Education.... working in an occupation that didn't require a degree. DOHHHHH Same work, same pay and I did it without school loans to pay. Formal Higher Education can be over rated at times... Flipping burgers will soon require at the least HS Diploma or equivilent or maybe a 2 year degree. Pay scale will not go up.... just the educational requirements. It is a shame we think it is good to carry 10's of thousands of dollars of debt to our new jobs and bitch that the employer will not help pick up YOU bill. Your original intent was to make enough money to live on... with the hopes you can pay your outstanding voluntary bill off.
 
I see this in our future.... the TRUE values of products and services may level out or get lower. Supposedly there are 5 people vieing for every job. Our population is getting larger so there will be no need to look for people.... add into that Illegals and uncontrolled immigration. Seeing a pattern here yet? So... this will cause the costs to employers to lower... hence lower pays.... and if the true costs of housing and large durable goods don't go down.... the lack of buyers will force more cutbacks or...doing the right thing...quit overcharging. We are seeing the inflated values of homes coming down so they can sell them.
 
The trick in this economy to survive this crap.... DO NOT LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS.... LIVE BELOW THEM. So... keep buying the Iphone 4s and the newest crap... but don't bitch when your world collapses because you weren't looking beyond your nose. The last humans alive may well be Farmers/Hunters/Gatherers...sound familiar? ??? Check our life style before Christ. The world will be for those who are willing to live by the sweat of their brow and the ability to use their hands, back and brains.
 
Education..good..but remember... from what I know of the man... Einstein could neither tie his own shoes nor drive a car.
 
My two cents:
 
On the issue of "illegals"...can anyone tell me, just from looking at someone, if they can tell who is a "legal" citizen? Or is this just an assumption made most often based on skin color and primary language? A large portion of my neighborhood is Hispanic, all speak Spanish amongst each other and are most comfortable in their first language, but will speak English when it is necessary. Most of them are Cuban, and being more than one generation removed, are US citizens. They have jobs and own their homes. Most keep their properties up, and are respectful of the neighbors (more so than some of the non-Hispanic neighbors, that's for sure). But they live in a country that treats them with suspicion and enacts laws that  would potentially require them to *prove* their citizenship in ways that others would not, just because someone might assume they could be Mexican. Because when we're talking about "illegal immigrants", that's what most people mean, but just won't say outright. I've seen more Eastern Europeans with lapsed student visas, and Southeast Asians who have asylum but not citizenship, to know that until there are solid statistics on exactly how much "illegal immigrants" actually cost the tax payer, and broken down by region or country of origin,  versus how much legal citizens cost the same government programs, this is all just more political hyperbole to me.
 
On the subject of a college degree: college recruiters will tell you that, depending on the sector you're planning on pursuing work in, a Bachelors degree is the new high school diploma. My sister-in-law just graduated, and has been working at a local wing franchise for years, and is thinking about looking for another job, but hasn't had any luck (because she has no experience in the field she was thinking of - just thinks that she should be able to step into a sales job because she's "hot"). Now all of a sudden, someone else working at the same place without the degree is inferior to her. I asked her "So, you spent all this money, have all these outstanding student loans, for this degree...and you're here. She doesn't, and has the same job. The only thing separating you is that piece of paper and the debt that came with it. Who's the smart one again?" Now she's talking about pursuing her Masters (in what she can't really say). I have a friend pursuing her MLS - lives at home, no job, because she only wants a job that relates to her major (was on unemployment for a while, as well), and is meanwhile racking up loan debt to the point that she's not sure she'll ever make enough to be pay off in order to get her life to where she wants it. And these are just people I know - I see these kinds of scenarios every single day in the students around me. I have been looking for a job out of state, and I can find jobs that have as much emphasis on experience and background as on education, because those candidates require less training, potentially, and cut down on the cost the the employer. But down here, all I see is degree, degree, degree. I work for a university, and they are listing Bachelors degrees as "preferred" qualifications for low staff positions that barely grade above receptionist, and are offering annual salaries in the low 20's...but that's what they value, and we've got a whole bunch of educated people here with amazingly low skill levels. I have a coworker who has two undergrad degrees, and has worked here over seven years, but can't even do the most basic functions in MS Excel. Which is a fundamental part of the job the staff on her level is supposed to do! It's mind-boggling.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on July 19, 2010, 11:40:15 AM
When I lived ion LA I was constantly questioned about my nationality. My hair was long and I used to dye it dark brown or black, I kept a tan, and I "looked" to be of some sort of Spanish heritage. So I got questioned. Every time I made the trip from San Diego to LA I got stopped at the checkpoint, asked a few questions, and usually I just laughed about it later.

This was more than 15 years ago! So what's all the fuss about now? This is nothing new. What is making the headlines now is something that's been going on for years, and I'm glad it has. It's what has helped keep us "safe" in the USA for all of this time, for the most part.

Breaking down this security measure will only make it harder for the people who are out there doing their jobs... to do their job. So look beyond the obvious. WHO wants that to happen? WHO is creating this controversy, and why?

Racial profiling... yeah, right. What a load of crap.

If it's a duck, and looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, you're just not allowed to ask it if it's a duck... right?

What if that duck has a bomb in his underwear? Oh, that could never happen.....

Remember the US internment camps? That was for the safety of America, and while it was not ideal, it's what they did then. We don't do anything like that now. And for the most part, we don't even ship them home to their original countries... only if they're caught breaking the law. Do you ever hear of an INS raid anymore?

What so many people still do not realize is that we are at war. The people we are fighting against hate America, Americans, have absolutely no value on innocent life, and would just as callously kill your newborn child as they would you, (in the name of their "GOD"... so unimaginable to someone like me) and the harder you make it for the people doing their jobs to keep America safe by all of this supposed "racial profiling" the easier you make it for something disastrous to happen here.

Is this really about Mexicans, or is this about securing the Mexican/American border? Just as an Italian can look Mexican, so can an Arab look Mexican, or someone of East Indian decent, or El Salvadore, Cuban, or Brazillian. It doesn't matter. What matters is not taking away the tools the law enforcement has for identifying a potential problem, and acting on it.

And that means potential terrorists, or drug lords who are murdering at will, or any of the threats facing our nation on a daily basis.

Taking away the tools.. why? So Mohamed, or Jose, or Maria doesn't have to answer a question about her citizenship? Seriously... does anyone here... ANYONE.... think that that is worth a nuke going off in one of our major cities?

Who do you think you're going to call when there really is a problem? 911?

What the "WHO" people want is for us all to keep fighting amongst ourselves so the "Who" people can promote their agendas. Oldest trick in the book... create a diversion so they can sneak in. Take away the tools and our liberties, and our freedoms, and our rights, and see what's left.

Let's never forget the events of 9-11, when we lost so many people, and our nation's capitol was under attack. Let's not forget the killings on the military base in Texas, that no one is calling a terrorist act, the underwear bomber, the shoe bomber, and the attempts recently in NYC.

Remember the people who jumped from he twin towers.

Recently I read a blurb about an animal abuser who chopped all four legs off of a dog (with an ax) and left it to die. It was found underneath a car where it had crawled to for safety.

These sick, disgusting people live right here amongst the rest of us, and the more difficult you make it for law enforcement to identify them and separate them from the rest of society, the worse it's going to get. Think about that for the rest of today.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on July 19, 2010, 01:54:00 PM
Zip, I just don't agree. We're talking about something that concerns assumptions of basic civil liberties (I'm not talking about liberties afforded to non-citizens - I'm talking about the right of a citizen to not be treated as suspect because of how they look and the language they may speak). Not sure how being Mexican has anything at all to do with national security concerns relating to Muslim terrorists?
 
The INS targets certain businesses down here, but it's kind of old-hat for us and doesn't make the news that much, and on any given trip up the interstates through North Florida and Georgia, I can see numerous border patrol agents and checkpoints looking for transport vans and long-haul trucks that might be carrying immigrants - some who are willingly being shipped in unsanitary conditions in unventilated trucks, and some (young women, sometimes girls) being unknowingly thrown into the sex-trade, which is still big business in S Florida.
 
My father-in-law moved here with his mother when he was a child. She married an American, and became a citizen, erroneously thinking that her child would be granted citizenship as well. The whole family went along thinking everything was fine, until he got pinched on a string of criminal charges about ten years ago (mostly petty, but one kind of seruious charge is what got him flagged eventually). INS came and picked him up from jail, and promptly put him on a plane to a country where he didn't speak the language, and had no way of earning a living. He's been there ever since, because he's blacklisted from returning permanantly, and doesn't have the money for even a short visit with his kids. He accepts it all with a healthy dose of good humor, these days. But there are cases in the Southeast and Southwest of parents being deported, and the kids being left behind. How does that policy benefit anyone, or keep anyone "safe"?
 
Sure, we're at war - at war with an organization with nebulous affiliations and no solid political or national ties, except that it's members almost all originate and are funded (although not exclusively) from the part of Asia we call the Middle East. This includes Pakistan. And some of our major trading partners. Doesn't mean this country is at war with ALL Muslim countries.
 
I just don't see the connection - to me, so much of the emphasis on "national security" allows for the slow erosion of certain fundamental liberties that everyone collectively used to be afforded (and just took for granted, I suppose). I don't see it making us as a nation any safer. I see it making an awful lot of people paranoid and prone to xenophobia. But it's my opinion, which I think may be in the minority, both here and in a broader sense. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 19, 2010, 04:37:38 PM
It's kind of a double edge sword where the collision of civil rights violations and common sense occurs. Common sense tells one through patterns what the most likely outcomes are and we use that to our advantage daily. Ie. if we lined up a priest, a playboy centerfold, a Japanese businessman, a Norwegian ski-jumper and and a generic middle eastern man and were told we needed to do a spot the terrorist which one would you pick?



Here is a partial re post of mine from about a year ago.

I spent a week in a class with someone who was employed by the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) in Ohio in 2004 I believe. The instructor was a stereotypical academian who swung far to the left in his political views. When we got on the subject of travel he (the student) explained how he was hauled off for additional screening. He said most likely because he was middle-eastern. This of course yielded a short but intense civil rights based tirade from the instructor. My classmates response was "but racial profiling works, we do it all the time. We haven't had a hijacking on EL AL ever because of it."

So right or wrong, civil liberties or not, it does work. However, how someone is profiled and how they are treated makes all the difference in the world.



That being said, there are plenty of issues with the INS and border agents that abound. I have a friend who is from Chicago,  Sicilian and extremely dark. He routinely traveled to Mexico City to perform contract work. On several occasions he was detained by INS because he could not produce a birth certificate despite the fact he held a valid passport and numerous other photo ID's.  One more than one occasion he was hauled into a room with Spanish speaking officers and grilled in Spanish. Mike spoke zero Spanish and had to listen to the officers tell/ask him things he could not understand extended periods of time.  He was never happy about it but eventually he got the "here we go again" attitude and begrudgingly wet along for the ride.

So evidently profiling does work, however it's going to piss some people off regardless. There has to be a reason that people get picked other than random screenings. If we were at ware with the Swedish Bikini Team I'd think random  checks of Oprah and Yoko Ono would be rather pointless.

Interesting link Ko-Shin, but why are we providing the detainees facilities that are more like a summer camp than a detention facility? I understand they need to be treated fairly and humanely, but this looks pretty cushy with nothing that would be even remotely associated with aversion therapy.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on July 19, 2010, 07:35:48 PM
"I'm talking about the right of a citizen to not be treated as suspect because of how they look and the language they may speak"

... How is someone, like a policeman or agent, supposed to know the difference between a legal citizen and an illegal one without asking them? With a crystal ball? It's a question, which is no more or less a question like... "Did you rob that bank?" or "Did you shoplift that candy bar?". The question is..."Are you a legal citizen of the USA"?

And if they are not, then they are guilty of a crime. Does it matter if they got away with it for 20 years before they were caught?

Believe me, I sympathize. I really do. Jose was a nice guy. I met people who came to this country to escape war, poverty, horrors beyond what we can imagine, nice family oriented people who are just looking for a good... or better  life. I've seen surgery scars from gunfire and bullets on the body of a man who lived in my neighborhood in LA, who came here to escape the fighting in his country.

I served on jury duty, and after I wrote a letter to Judge Vardaro. This was many years ago, and the only reason I am mentioning it now is so you can see I am sincere. In my letter I told him how I felt it was an honor for every American to serve, and how all of my life I have been thankful that the only thing I had to do to become a citizen was to be born here, when I know others have gone through hell to be here. My grandparents were immigrants from Italy... legal.

In fact the reason Italians were called Wops was because when they immigrated en mass from Europe after (and during) the wars many did not have birth certificated and other necessary paperwork, so the Americans put a sign around their necks that read WOP... which meant, "With Out Papers".

My argument is in keeping the borders safe. And people are dying to get here, whether it's by boat or by enslavement, or on foot through the hottest desert travel, they want to be here. Most just want a job while we shell out untold amounts for people who think they are entitled to a lifetime of welfare, and keeping murderers "comfy" in prison.

I'd rather make a hard-working immigrant legal ~and kick out the ones who don't respect what a great nation we still have...

"Not sure how being Mexican has anything at all to do with national security concerns relating to Muslim terrorists? "

That is the media.
This is where common sense needs to rule.
The war between the politicians want us all to believe it's all about the Mexicans, but it's not just about them. But the Mexicans are great in number here and getting them angry gets us fighting amongst ourselves. Divide and conquer.

However, as stated previously, if the agents can't tell the difference between an Italian and a Mexican, how can the tell the difference between a brown skinned Mexican and a potential terrorist coming in across the Mexican border?
Or the Canadian border for that matter.  Or a drug crazed gang of ruthless killers?

While I am all for human rights... humans make some pretty poor choices.

Coming up next... the tattoos.

Tattooing our SSI number on our bodies somewhere to prove our citizenship. They have ink that's only visible under a blacklight. Like someone (NP?) said, try to get a good job without an SSI number, or proof of who you are. Driver's licenses can only be obtained by showing your numbers or your birth certificate. Soon, maybe they'll start with issuing babies a number and tattooing right at the hospital.  Who knows. It could all be a lead in to that agenda.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on July 19, 2010, 07:40:43 PM
Cool blacklight tattoos:

http://www.tattooartists.org/Gal3975_UV_Blacklight_Ink.asp (http://www.tattooartists.org/Gal3975_UV_Blacklight_Ink.asp)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on July 19, 2010, 08:14:32 PM
.. How is someone, like a policeman or agent, supposed to know the  difference between a legal citizen and an illegal one without asking  them? With a crystal ball? It's a question, which is no more or less a  question like... "Did you rob that bank?" or "Did you shoplift that  candy bar?". The question is..."Are you a legal citizen of the USA"?

Well, that's part of my point - the automatic assumption of "guilt", giving rise to authorization to have to give proof of citizenship. For every "guilty" individual, how many are stopped who are legal  citizens? Plus, those other example questions cannot be asked without advising a suspect of their Miranda Rights (specifically, the right to legal council prior to making any statement while in custody, and there's the Fifth Amendment that relates to the right to not self-incriminate).

I don't regularly carry any form of identification beyond my state-issued driver's license and my work ID badge. If I were to get pulled over for no cause other than someone decided they didn't like my "look", I couldn't necessarily prove that I was who my ID says I am...and those types of ID are still easy to fake. If I had to present a more "official" form of proof, such as a birth certificate, on the spot...I'd be SOL. It is, in my opinion, a slippery slope to targeting other groups, based on other ethnic or racial identifiers - or, in the extreme, say, political affiliation or religious practice. With all of the things that could keep the police occupied (not the INS, here, but your everyday city officer or state trooper), should this be so high on the list of priorities - specifically when we have a national government agency devoted to it? The SECOND the idea is floated, in any official capacity, to tattoo or otherwise mark anyone as a means of national identification...the very idea of totalitarianism on that level in this country makes me nauseous just thinking about it. 

I agree that there could (should?) be a program that would promote citizenship for immigrants who are working and supporting families. I mean, this is a big country, with a generous spirit, and people coming here to better their lives and make their own way is what the US is all about.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 19, 2010, 08:56:00 PM
" I met people who came to this country to escape war, poverty, horrors beyond what we can imagine, nice family oriented people who are just looking for a good... or better  life."
 
Funny how I have known Americans in the same boat.... But for the most part...if you can show war, and horrors.... I think there is a law that would give you "refugee status"
 
Don't get me wrong but if the claioms are that we don't take care of OUR OWN and their families...why is it expected of me to do this for ILLEGALS BEFORE my own???? Charity has always begun at home.... Let there be no loss of health and needed fortune before my family is taken care of. As I see it....they are taking from my family instead of me willingly giving. Call me a crank but that is what life is about.
 
 
 
"I'm talking about the right of a citizen to not be treated as suspect because of how they look and the language they may speak"

... How is someone, like a policeman or agent, supposed to know the difference between a legal citizen and an illegal one without asking them? With a crystal ball? It's a question, which is no more or less a question like... "Did you rob that bank?" or "Did you shoplift that candy bar?". The question is..."Are you a legal citizen of the USA"?

And if they are not, then they are guilty of a crime. Does it matter if they got away with it for 20 years before they were caught?

Believe me, I sympathize. I really do. Jose was a nice guy. I met people who came to this country to escape war, poverty, horrors beyond what we can imagine, nice family oriented people who are just looking for a good... or better  life. I've seen surgery scars from gunfire and bullets on the body of a man who lived in my neighborhood in LA, who came here to escape the fighting in his country.

I served on jury duty, and after I wrote a letter to Judge Vardaro. This was many years ago, and the only reason I am mentioning it now is so you can see I am sincere. In my letter I told him how I felt it was an honor for every American to serve, and how all of my life I have been thankful that the only thing I had to do to become a citizen was to be born here, when I know others have gone through hell to be here. My grandparents were immigrants from Italy... legal.

In fact the reason Italians were called Wops was because when they immigrated en mass from Europe after (and during) the wars many did not have birth certificated and other necessary paperwork, so the Americans put a sign around their necks that read WOP... which meant, "With Out Papers".

My argument is in keeping the borders safe. And people are dying to get here, whether it's by boat or by enslavement, or on foot through the hottest desert travel, they want to be here. Most just want a job while we shell out untold amounts for people who think they are entitled to a lifetime of welfare, and keeping murderers "comfy" in prison.

I'd rather make a hard-working immigrant legal ~and kick out the ones who don't respect what a great nation we still have...

"Not sure how being Mexican has anything at all to do with national security concerns relating to Muslim terrorists? "

That is the media.
This is where common sense needs to rule.
The war between the politicians want us all to believe it's all about the Mexicans, but it's not just about them. But the Mexicans are great in number here and getting them angry gets us fighting amongst ourselves. Divide and conquer.

However, as stated previously, if the agents can't tell the difference between an Italian and a Mexican, how can the tell the difference between a brown skinned Mexican and a potential terrorist coming in across the Mexican border?
Or the Canadian border for that matter.  Or a drug crazed gang of ruthless killers?

While I am all for human rights... humans make some pretty poor choices.

Coming up next... the tattoos.

Tattooing our SSI number on our bodies somewhere to prove our citizenship. They have ink that's only visible under a blacklight. Like someone (NP?) said, try to get a good job without an SSI number, or proof of who you are. Driver's licenses can only be obtained by showing your numbers or your birth certificate. Soon, maybe they'll start with issuing babies a number and tattooing right at the hospital.  Who knows. It could all be a lead in to that agenda.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on July 19, 2010, 10:43:39 PM
On the multilingual thing. What worked for the last 50 years wont work for the next 50.
The people who are multilingual will have the advange in the job market over those that don't have language skills.
Thats speaking to the tools your kids will need. Do not consider it from the view of what was good enough for you. Thats backward thinking. The question is whats good enough for them. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on July 19, 2010, 10:48:27 PM
" I met people who came to this country to escape war, poverty, horrors beyond what we can imagine, nice family oriented people who are just looking for a good... or better  life."
 
Funny how I have known Americans in the same boat.... But for the most part...if you can show war, and horrors.... I think there is a law that would give you "refugee status"
 
Don't get me wrong but if the claioms are that we don't take care of OUR OWN and their families...why is it expected of me to do this for ILLEGALS BEFORE my own? ??? Charity has always begun at home.... Let there be no loss of health and needed fortune before my family is taken care of. As I see it....they are taking from my family instead of me willingly giving. Call me a crank but that is what life is about.

 
 

Some guy that raped and murdered a child is sitting in prison, taking away from your family too.

Our government is giving away billions to other countries.

Where does it all start, and end?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 20, 2010, 07:30:42 AM
So....let's hurry and plan for our children to go out of the Country for work or.... work for a foreign firm. Now, let me get this right.... a lot of us run around and cry about jobs leaving the country and the fact that we buy too much foriegn products but..... when it comes to our kids.... foreign is a savior..
 
This has become so convoluted. I want the best for my kid and Grand Kids, but I want it to be better for them HERE and many would look at me with a jaundiced eye if I programed them to work for a foreign entity. I do believe that it was the love affair with saving money buying foreign and now making money working for them either overseas or here. Does anyone see the dichotomy in this?
 
If this is what it takes to work in our country.... hmmmmm Not don't get me wrong ...foreign language is a good elective if that is what your child wants. I do not think it should be mandatory.
 
I am not one to say all the time that "if it was good enough for me". There are things that are good and an improvement. But some of what we had is the basics and are the foundation. I wish education was better.... It was shown that we "throw" billions of dollars into the educational system ( starting in the late 60's when the Fed Government basically took over the Educational System from the states) and the SAT's haven't moved up in average enough to really justify "dollars for improvements". I want more bang for that buck.
 
I want the system to improve in that there will be NO reason to have our Children ( young adults) drawing welfare forever. I want them to take the intiative to start at the bottom if they have to and work their way up. I want them to know and live a life where they know the difference between right and wrong. Where they become reaquainted with SHAME as well as real accolades for a job well done as opposed for a "you showed up Award". I know this is the job of the parents...yet it is a shame that a lot of parents don't even know so they pass this ethos on to their prodigy.
 
I want a better life for our children. But it can't happen for many because we have an "owe me" attitude. My stand on learning another language is just a small part of this whole picture.... drop outs increase as we speak. I want my family's children educated and excel in the basics of our society.... "Reading Writing and Arithmatic". Without learning the basics.... the rest can be a waste. I want them educated and trained to be able to get a good job or start a good business in their own country and be proud and loyal Americans. Is that too much to ask? 
 
 
 
On the multilingual thing. What worked for the last 50 years wont work for the next 50.
The people who are multilingual will have the advange in the job market over those that don't have language skills.
Thats speaking to the tools your kids will need. Do not consider it from the view of what was good enough for you. Thats backward thinking. The question is whats good enough for them.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on July 20, 2010, 07:37:13 AM
My husband is of Italian descent.  When he was young and living in L.A. he was assumed or asked if he was Mexican all the time.  He says it never bothered him.  He knew what he looked like and says it is what it is.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 20, 2010, 08:08:26 AM
Here is how most of it starts with a lot of ILLEGAL Aliens.
 
Hidden Cameras on the Arizona Border 2: Drugs, Guns and 850 Illegal Aliens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KcwIy_fQuU&feature=player_embedded#)#!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on July 20, 2010, 08:20:08 AM
Lifetime, on the topic of "You showed up, you get an award", the head of my organizational unit at work is actually floating the idea of giving all of our maintenance and custodial staff "exceptional" on their upcoming evaluations on the (erroneous) belief that it would only be "fair" because their supervisors all got exceptional ratings - which is false, and I think it's pathetic that our VP, who possesses a PhD, doesn't even bother to get his damn facts straight about the eval ratings of his own departments. So, we're calling it the "Everybody gets a ribbon" approach to management.  ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 20, 2010, 08:47:14 AM
And this crap starts with a NO SCORE Kids Soccer game to numerous Valedictorians in a graduating class to a child not picked for a Little League or Soccer team. We have lost the necessary part of life... we do NOT always win but... it is meant to happen to make you strive even harder. When someone tells me 'it isn't fair"...I tell them there is nothing written that LIFE isn't fair. We pass over "reality" and want fantasy because... it makes them FEEL GOOD. I believe we try to eliminate too many emotions... fear, disappointment, shame and contrition are as much a part of life as anything. We have become a society that has tried to hide those at every turn. And no, I am not a glum person.... and no, I didn't get picked at Little League, was never valedictorian, but I didn't do half bad at what I attempted. So... I had no need of a "showed up" award. To get the brass ring.... you have to put an effort into it.
 
Lifetime, on the topic of "You showed up, you get an award", the head of my organizational unit at work is actually floating the idea of giving all of our maintenance and custodial staff "exceptional" on their upcoming evaluations on the (erroneous) belief that it would only be "fair" because their supervisors all got exceptional ratings - which is false, and I think it's pathetic that our VP, who possesses a PhD, doesn't even bother to get his damn facts straight about the eval ratings of his own departments. So, we're calling it the "Everybody gets a ribbon" approach to management.  ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 20, 2010, 09:20:35 AM
Agreed, participation awards piss me off. Getting a trophy for or whatever for participating is counter productive IMO. It demeans the top people. This is coming from a parent who has a non-athletic son. He knows it too and will freely admit it at eight years of age.

I also agree on the whole rating system for employees. They have now been turned into essay forms with subjective measurement scales that allow reviewers to hand out ratings that make no sense. HR departments have been getting out of control over the past couple of decades in a lot of areas. Of course they have the mighty sword of compliance they can wave to scare the minions back into line. That way they can do HR related tasks rather than doing what's in their job description. Then again it gives HR something to do when it's done... make the results smell like roses.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on July 20, 2010, 11:55:00 AM
Not only do they give out awards for showing up, everyone makes the team/sqauad nowadays too.  Whatever happened to try-outs?  No wonder there are 90 kids on some of the football teams and 25 cheerleaders at the games.  That's a lot of money.  Yes I get it that they want to give everyone a chance to try it out.....just throwing it out there.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 20, 2010, 12:37:48 PM
Spreadin' the Wealth - yes?

When everyone is rewarded - is it really a reward?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on July 20, 2010, 02:33:12 PM
I don't mind the $7 trophies for kids that are younger...mine is 7 now. After about this point I think they should earn it. No reason to emotionally traumatize them before this age, there is enough time for that later LOL
We have transitioned from soccer to gymnastics so the trophy thing is a moot point. They have shows where you earn the right to do your apparatus. I like that.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 20, 2010, 06:07:53 PM
PAPERZZZZ PLEEZZZE!!!

 >:( :rant: :slapface:
 
 
 
We just come home from...Voting in our General Primary...and Guess What... ??? ...them Son's of Bitc...asked us for a picture ID... >:( ...what wrong with them...can they not see that...we are True Blue-White and Red Americano's...I just hate when anyone...stops us...and ask us for an ID...that should be a Crime...Damm it...Only in the USA... ;D ...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 20, 2010, 06:26:30 PM
Interesting letter....
 
 
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/borderpatrol.asp (http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/borderpatrol.asp)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on July 20, 2010, 08:21:57 PM
Interesting letter....
 
 
[url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/borderpatrol.asp[/url] ([url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/borderpatrol.asp[/url])


I have some quibbles about that letter (everyone will just be shocked at that, I'm sure  ;) ), the biggest being that while yes, it's confirmed as the contents of a *real letter*, some of the points made may not be exactly what I'd call entirely straight up factually accurate, and some are downright strawman arguments.

If ALL illegal aliens constitute less than 5% of the entire work force, then would they also use the equivalent percentage of government service & program resources? Are they somehow using a disproportionately higher percentage of public assistance (taking dependents out of the equation)?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 20, 2010, 09:00:06 PM
I didn't say it was accurate but... to answer your question on %
 
They do not give anything back into the system in some cases.... look at property/school tax. Then when they utilize the Medical system....which they again do not for the most part...put anything in....it is usually the most expensive care..... Emergency room. I seem to have watched a hearing before our legislators in which the Head of some AZ Hospital system gave reports on ILLEGAL ALIENS being brought inot the Hospital system and had been in it for over a year...cost...almost a million dollars for each bill. They did NOT give to the system. When the Mexican Government was informed of them, THEY wouldn't make arrangements to pick them up for return to Mexico. The Hospital had even offered the $30-$40K it would have cost to send them back.... again, not a dollar from the Aliens. In that way... it seems they use a disproportionate amount of programs that should be given to Americans. They make less money so if taxes are paid..it is less than an equivilent cross section of Citizens.
 
As far as the letter...I think I would trust someone who has to actually dirty their hands and sweat on this issue than one who counts beans and reads reports. If you want to find out how many cigarette butts are in a square mile of a military base.... you don't ask the General....you ask the Private.
 
 
Interesting letter....
 
 
[url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/borderpatrol.asp[/url] ([url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/borderpatrol.asp[/url])


I have some quibbles about that letter (everyone will just be shocked at that, I'm sure  ;) ), the biggest being that while yes, it's confirmed as the contents of a *real letter*, some of the points made may not be exactly what I'd call entirely straight up factually accurate, and some are downright strawman arguments.

If ALL illegal aliens constitute less than 5% of the entire work force, then would they also use the equivalent percentage of government service & program resources? Are they somehow using a disproportionately higher percentage of public assistance (taking dependents out of the equation)?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 21, 2010, 06:55:34 AM
We just come home from...Voting in our General Primary...and Guess What... ??? ...them Son's of Bitc...asked us for a picture ID... >:( ...what wrong with them...can they not see that...we are True Blue-White and Red Americano's...I just hate when anyone...stops us...and ask us for an ID...that should be a Crime...Damm it...Only in the USA... ;D ...

We have had to show our ID here for quite a few years.  Mostly I think it's to confirm you are voting at the right precinct.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on July 21, 2010, 07:38:29 AM
Quote
They do not give anything back into the system in some cases.... look at property/school tax

Renters don't put into the system. People who don't make a lot of money (minimum wage) don't put into the system. People with good accountants don't put into the system. If you are going to go after the 'deadbeat' illegals, go after the 'deadbeat' 'legal' Americans as well. (If this is a debate about theft of services)
 
The big issue then is the tax code. But that doesn't rally the troops to action now does it?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 21, 2010, 08:21:39 AM
The renters don't directly put into the tax base but the Home owner, landlord and the Scumlords should be. The latter... maybe not so much. What this covers is a "house" that as many as 7 or more Illegal Alien families live in. To even make this come anywhere near what would work...there should be ONE family per residence maybe 2 at best. They all seem to work... usually at the same place, and within walking distance if possible. I am familiar with this in both the Spanish and Asian system here. I knew of ONE house years ago on the West Hill of PA that contained shifts of workers from a local restaurant... I didn't ask for papers LOL and I am sure... seeing them at the local establishment...there was no or rudiment ability to use English. I know that is not a good gauge but for restaurant workers...the only one who should have this skill would be the ones taking the orders.
 
Now, let me place the "Dead Beat" LEGALS into perspective. I have said this sooooo many times... If you are the owners/operators of a business that supplies products and services to us..... and we think you are not paying your "fair Share". Point to ponder folks.... so we get the Government to redo the tax laws....make those more affluent business owner/operators to pay their "fair share"...here is what happens.
 
Their tax share goes up...either fair or at a HIGHER rate. Now we wring our hands and say "FINALLY" ;D . So we had been paying $4 for a widget from one of these companies.... we now find the price of a widget goes up to $5. Guess why???? OVERHEAD is determined into the cost of product/service. In reality.... the rich NEVER really pay those taxes... we do in our purchace of said items and services. Do we make laws on what they can charge?
 
Now, this has happened in the Rental Property business. IE...SCUMLORDS and the SECTION 8 system. They buy a block of houses in the less desirable sections, usually. and they put just enough work into them so they pass inspection for permission to use the Section 8 rule. It is the DPW that sets the max on the rent that they will pay for the occupant. The Section 8 occupant does pay a paltry amount of it on their own but... the Scumlord gets a PA State Check sent to his/her account on time every month during occupancy. The Scumlord may not even worry about the money from the occupant but loves the steady check from PA. So...now let us now throw into the cost of doing business....sayyyyy Oh yes...the Sewer Bill. The Scumlord is already charging the max allowed by DPW and now can't tack the fee onto the stated rent. Law states that it is the "HOME OWNER'S responsiblity to pay that fee....so now they have to take it off their "profit margin" Wahhhh Wahhhh....no more trips to Vegas or Florida for a while. Now those not in Section 8 can up the rent. What I find funny... DPW will not allow the increase to cover the fee in outside SEC.8 housing but.... DPW pays the fees generated in their Housing Units. Poo is poo.
 
So, there are some systems that do regulate prices, still today. Point is...in the end... it is the middle and lower class that pays a lot of the tax levied on those more affluent... cost of doing business. Think about that when you buy your next widget. Raise the Affluent's taxes and you raise prices.... Hmmmm dog chasing his tail????


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 21, 2010, 10:36:41 AM
My direction I was going at is this... If 8 families are in one house as opposed to say 6 houses.... how does that benefit the tax base. They stack them in so their "rent" is low per person and even more money gets siphoned back home. I think Code would have a field day if they knew or even cared.
 
I recall many years ago that a certain building owned by a valley import...was used to house MANY.... but not positive of the legality of the situation. I was under the impression that they were illegals either passing through or maybe illegals working locally and in need of a roof and secluded place to hold up in. I wonder how much rent they paid??? And was it even reported as rent?? SO many questions and no solid answers.
 
 
Also.... there is a movement afoot again to eliminate the Electoral College and go to Popular vote. I can guess the WHY but caution the implimentation. I see some problems with this...
 
1) we will NOT have a POTUS?VPOTUS from low population States. They will come frrom states like NY, TX, CA etc.
 
2) It can make it easier to "stack the deck" if one party or the other has the demographic advantage in said controlling states.
 
3) with the problem with "border" states of the southwest. Those who vote there are prone to one party for the most part. Florida has this demo as well. Larger populated states lean more left than those which have less concentrations of people. They have more people who "need" and use the programs set in place over the last 7 decades, just to assist their day to day lives.
 
It seems we are doing our damdest to screw up our founding documents. The Electoral College allows for ALL States to be recognized and part of the process. We are a Representative Republic. We elect people to "REPRESENT" our wishes....though lately that is an item of contention...but that, being said, is the intention of the system. I shudder to think what a popular vote on Income Taxes would produce.
 
Maybe we could set up restrictions on the eligibility to vote...shades of years gone by. Those who own property are the only ones allowed to vote on school and property issues. Eliminate eligibility to vote if you recieve certain Government Assistance with no individual contributions unless there is a Physical or Mental reason. So many ways and angles on what might be construed as "fair" and "popular". I am just throwing out these thoughts ...not suggesting they are made so, but we all need to think with our brains in these matters. Sometimes we have to be very careful what we wish for.
 
 
 
 
You chose the correct word...(directly)...but they do put in to...through their rent...also a landlord or as you say it scumlord... ;D ...can ask the state to look into section 8 increase...if there are an increase to the landlord by local or state government...of basic utility costs...
 
You are right if the taxes are raised for a business...they in turn will raise their product costs...or service costs...Most do not understand that... ;) ...
 
As to the Sharon Sewage...last time I was in the valley...I was introduced to some one...that owns forty rentals in Sharon...yes he was on the list...I asked him...said that he caught up with the city...so I must take his word... ::) ...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 23, 2010, 12:30:35 PM
JournOlist - interesting . . .

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704684604575381083191313448.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Darticle (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704684604575381083191313448.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Darticle)

The Vast Left Wing Conspiracy.

One could argue both sides . . . I suppose the important thing is what values lay underneath said conspiracies . . .

Who "owns" truth?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on July 23, 2010, 12:48:40 PM
Interesting, but I still don't trust the press to bring me "the truth." Now on the other hand, I (like many others) could not pick "the truth" up out of a lineup. I realize that so I have to wade through the array of factoids and busts of misinformation and apply my skills of cognition to the best of my ability and form my own opinion. Or to put it more simply, I have to use my own bullshit meter.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 26, 2010, 09:05:28 AM
Wikileaks . . . very interesting. Not so much an Administration thing as a journalism thing. I like this particular fellow's thoughts on journalism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/jul/26/press-freedom-wikileaks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/jul/26/press-freedom-wikileaks)

Here's an excellent quote from the article:

"As far as possible, facts should be verifiable. If journalists want long-term credibility for their profession, they have to go in that direction. Have more respect for readers."

Sometimes I think they think we're dumb.



(Well - some of us are - but I ain't sayin' who . . . lol . . . .  )


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on July 26, 2010, 11:33:52 AM
Wikileaks . . . very interesting. Not so much an Administration thing as a journalism thing. I like this particular fellow's thoughts on journalism.

[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/jul/26/press-freedom-wikileaks[/url] ([url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2010/jul/26/press-freedom-wikileaks[/url])

Here's an excellent quote from the article:

"As far as possible, facts should be verifiable. If journalists want long-term credibility for their profession, they have to go in that direction. Have more respect for readers."

Sometimes I think they think we're dumb. (Well - some of us are - but I ain't sayin' who . . . lol . . . .  )


It's me, isn't it, life? You're just too polite to say.  ;D (story of my life :P )


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 26, 2010, 12:15:26 PM
Lol -

I'm actually of the thought that a person can be smart, but people are stupid. the larger the collective, the dumber it gets.

I find MENSA ironic.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 26, 2010, 12:57:49 PM
On the "smart, intelligence, learned" thing.... so many factors in the measure....

How does this affect you and your life?
 
Is it profitable?
 
Is there an upside for YOU?
 
Is it practicle?
 
How will it make me look to others?
 
Is formal education really necessary to live?
 
 
In mind and "MENSA". There are levels of all of this.... Even Einstien couldn't tie his shoes or drive an automobile.... first...he didn't NEED to tie shoes and second.... he saw no desire to go beyond pedaling a bicycle.... and I am sure he got lots of rides in autos.
 
There is always a difference in what is preceived and what is reality. Is that a measure of intellegence? Watch a good magician sometimes.... always reminds me of our Government at it's best.... :o


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on July 26, 2010, 10:48:25 PM
There's a line in a movie that goes something like "A person is smart. People aredumb, panicky dangerous animals." and one of my favorite authors wrote “The intelligence of the creature known as a crowd, is the square root of the number of people in it.”

I don't know any members of MENSA, although I'm surrounded by PhD's (some are actual scientists). Don't you have to PAY to take the test?  :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 27, 2010, 07:13:06 AM
Yeah - there's membership fees too. My wife said she joined years ago to meet smarter guys. She quit payin' dues shortly after starting I guess. Perhaps it wasn't worth it after all . . .

She told me I should join. I asked her what for? Besides - I wouldn't belong to any organization that would allow me as a member.

Back to topic. Sorta - maybe . . . I had a peculiar dream last night. The President was on one of his many speaking engagements and was here in our town. I was behind a building by a loading dock when I saw him looking over some papers while talking to one of his advisors, He was wearing a pair of women's shoes . . . and he was very upset when he saw I saw that. Then I woke up.

Um - - - yeah . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on July 27, 2010, 07:33:55 AM
So Obama is really Hillary in disguise? Or is Michelle running the show?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 27, 2010, 08:33:50 AM
I don't know why he was upset. They WERE nice shoes.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 30, 2010, 09:45:36 PM
I think a quick primer in logic would serve anyone well that listens to politicians and their many minions. (For example, in many of President Obama's speeches prior to the passage of the Healthcare Act, his arguments were based on appeals to authority, consequences and pity - all of which are errors in relevance.) Here's a nice place to start:

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/ (http://www.logicalfallacies.info/)

I might add that's it's likely to be useful with children, pesky relaties, and forum denizens such as myself . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on July 31, 2010, 07:56:56 AM
And NEVER forget his favorites.... "In the Previous Administration".... "because of the actions of the Previous Administration".... or "inheritance from a Previous Administration"... and I am sure there are many others..... oh and we can't forget this one.... "It would have been much worse." This Man and his Minions will never take onerous of anything they can tie to someone else. Why take the "my bad" if you can hand it off.
 
I think a quick primer in logic would serve anyone well that listens to politicians and their many minions. (For example, in many of President Obama's speeches prior to the passage of the Healthcare Act, his arguments were based on appeals to authority, consequences and pity - all of which are errors in relevance.) Here's a nice place to start:

[url]http://www.logicalfallacies.info/[/url] ([url]http://www.logicalfallacies.info/[/url])

I might add that's it's likely to be useful with children, pesky relaties, and forum denizens such as myself . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on July 31, 2010, 10:12:56 PM
http://undoctrination.org/ (http://undoctrination.org/)

I like this site. The writers are younger - and think well. I'm a fan.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 01, 2010, 06:58:47 AM
I saw that yesterday for the first time. Very interesting stuff there.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 01, 2010, 12:26:55 PM
I like it because it ain't all stuffy and academic like the Heritage Foundation. there's a little broader view than just the conservative brushstroke. As a Libertarian - it's nice to stumble across some decently hep Libertarian stuff.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 02, 2010, 08:30:40 AM
Right now they are gearing up to "receive Bam Bam in Atlanta. He is slated to speak at the DAV Convention around 11:30. One of my friends is in attendance and he told me yesterday that Secret Service has been there for at least 2 days in the open.... on chandiliers and in hand driers in the mens rooms.
 
He is not a fan of Bam Bam and has said he will find more important things to do than to act like "Pavlov's Dog" at a chance to see this POTUS. He said they were "selling" tickets to a breakfast this morning but it may keep some from getting "good seats" in the venue. So now the ones who bought the tickets are giving them away...Friend said if he is given one...it doesn't get used *S*. This POTUS will reference the previous Administration and the Wars we are in like he wasn't part of it. Hmmm Wasn't he a Senator in his previos life and it isn't hard to check his votes back then. I think a lot of us would be very surprised at his votes on them *S*.
 
Oh.... did I mention...Bam Bam had a function that he set up in Atlanta before this.... to come to raise money for his party. So I wonder.... was this meeting with the DAV just an
added diversion?  I don't know.... but just wonder.
 
I hope he mentions Sen. Webb from Virginia  ;) . Maybe he can explain Webb's plan to CUT out care for  ischemic heart disease, Parkinson's disease, and B cell leukemias as a presumptive of Dioxin Poisoning from service in South East Asia. And..... maybe he can explain Webb's plans to give pay raises to our active military...oh but wait.... your raise would be 1.9% if you served in a "combat zone" and 1.4% if you didn't. Hmmmm Bi level base pay... Here is my take on this... PAY ALL THE SAME BASE PAY.... If you go to a "combat zone"... you get hazardous duty pays and other specialty pays to compensate for your duty and add the fact.... it is tax free. Why have a Bi level Basepay??
 
I have called my Legislators and expressed my concern over any attempt to "balance" any budget shortfalls on the backs of those who gave and/or are still giving. I think Webb's projected "savings" on this, was estimated to be 12 billion dollars. Is this what YOU want??? I am no Beancounter by any means but this is an insult to our Veterans and military. Sooooo I wonder if Obama will explain this to the Convention of the Disabled American Veterans. ???
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 03, 2010, 07:41:20 AM
Well, let me be the first one.... Lou Dobb's has been off CNN for quite a while and is now a contributor for FOX. That being said, I am a Dobb's fan and I like that idea he walks the walk as well. He is married to a Hispanic woman. With all of these Bills and Programs having been "pushed and passed" Lou may have been one of the few who actually read any of them.
 
This is a race.... nothing more, nothing less.... He/she who ( as in political parties) passes this immigration bill and allows ILLEGAL ALIENS to stay and work towards citizenship, will ...after perhaps 5 years and said citizenship...are to be quasi guaranteed... the party vote from said shiney new citizen and family. Here is what I have found.... The U.S. of A can handle approx. 100,000/year of LEGITIMATE IMMIGRATION . This makes up for approx. 100,000 who pass away or leave the country. Our BASIC AMERICAN FAMILY has an average of 2-2.5 children, which is well lower than most of the immigrants coming in. So with 12-20 million that is jumping in, there is no catchup in all the basic infrastuctures in living, educational and health.
 
It is estimated...at this rate and this proposal.... we will only be able to maintain this whole picture, maybe another 25 years.... Here is the bad news, my children and Grand children will be dealing with this.... the good news.... I figure my wife and I will be at best, a memory.
 
My whole premise has been and remains so.... the minute Jose and Juanita ILLEGALLY ENTERS our borders, they are LAWBREAKERS. This same thing goes toward the ones from Nicaragua, Columbia and from Afghanistan, Syria ( yes folks... there is about 1000 non hispanics caught that are from a Country on the watch list). Our Country is SO BAD that thousands want to leave but MILLIONS want in..hmmmmm :huh:


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 03, 2010, 08:12:10 AM
With all the people coming here illegally it makes me wonder just how bad things are in their place of birth. The third world I can understand the wanting to escape, it's a no brainer really. Canadians and Europeans have been coming here illegally for a long time as well. I don't know what things are like there but at the moment they pretty much suck here.

The current train though seems to be that if the government can't get the private sector back on track it will just create government jobs for some of the people. That's all well and good as at least some people get back to work. However most of the jobs that the government created do not fall into the "skilled labor", technical or professional categories. We all hear about the outsourcing of professional and technical jobs as well as job shopping for the skilled labor market to China and where ever. I haven't heard a single thing from the government giving incentives to hire it's citizens.

I have two young children that are going to be asking me what should I do when I grow up? The choice will be theirs, but the question is going to come to me eventually. I would never steer my kids towards a career in computers. Being a doctor used to be great, but with health care reform I fear that will become a bad decision.  So what do I tell them? Find a good burger joint with benefits? I'm no different than anyone else,  I want better for my kids that what I have. With the growing population the competition for jobs will be even stiffer, add to that a lack of jobs and it's a recipe for nothing good.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 03, 2010, 08:53:34 AM
My thoughts have always been to stem the flow of ILLEGAL Imigration.... no matter the origin. I feel THEIR HOME COUNTRIES should be doing more for their own citizens as opposed to US having to.
 
I am also of the school of thought..... have your children learn how to use their hands.... build or repair. Once they know that, no one can take away a means with which they can put food on the table. They can do this activity on their own or as a contracted entity. The rich will always need someone to build/repair their homes, fix their Vehicles, plumbing, electrical service etc. The world will be in the hands of those who can build, install and repair.
 
I see a time where a degree in geology and music may be moot. This may come to the medical and financial enterprises as well. In fact, this seems to be a regressive time.... you find some towns that print their own money, set up Barter systems and are relying on the dirty hands as opposed to shuffling papers and ideas. I think we will, again measure a man or woman on their abilities to be as self sustaining as they can be and as responsible as they should be.
 
Call me a curmudgeon if you want but... hard times are not finished yet and until we learn how to balance debits and credits in our home.... it will continue. This has come to a point where we need to decide the differences between NEEDS and WANTS and act on that and not what the "Jones" have and do.
 
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 03, 2010, 09:05:59 AM
Had to chuckle a bit at this.... My son has done better than I did. whether he admits it or not.... there was help in there from his mother and I... ( kids tend to forget I guess). But, that being said... the last thing I will not tolerate is this.... if you "stretch" and "gamble" to grab that ring..... don't bitch if you can't quite get it. It may be that you are toting too much "stuff" to get to it as opposed to taking baby steps to get there. I have found it is few who can make their first million in the first year and even less can hold onto it. And in the "end" He who dies with the most toys, does not win.... he/she is left with at best one set of clothing and a box to spend a lot of time in. The only peace they have is knowing that it will be the family who will be fighting over what is NOT in the box. Is it really the purpose of a human to have wealth acquired when they die or use it while still alive???
 
So... we do tend to try to keep our Children on course, even though they sometimes look for the EASY as opposed to the HARD....sometimes losing more than their original investment of time, effort, material and wealth.
 
"a good burger can taste better than a mediocre steak" Learn the difference.
 
 
I always hear the saying…I want my children to have better than what I have…Not pointing you out NP…the question is…what do people really mean when they say this…has everyone really had it that bad…were you not brought up to work hard for what you want…did not… your parent or parents work hard…not only for themselves…but also for you…I remember that my Father worked at least two and sometimes three jobs…never once heard him say that it was to have better then his parents…or better then anyone else...he gave us plenty…we had...and still do have a good life…but we had to earn it…never heard him say that he wanted us to have better then him…but would say if you want something…you work hard enough and you can have it…so look around…do we really have it all that Bad…is living in the USA…all that Bad…some times we struggle…and I am sure we all have…if not now…but some time in our lives…now my Father and Mother would tell you…that they have had a Hard Life…but I think that they would also tell you…that there is not much that they would change if they could…I don’t remember much about my Grand parents…but what I do remember is that they always had a smile…they always were there to help others…and as far as I can tell they told my parents…that if they wanted something they had to work hard for it…so What…Does one mean when they say that they want their Children to have better then them…Just Curious…


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 03, 2010, 09:28:44 AM
Simply put, I want my legacies to have a better life than I do. Not that there is anything wrong with mine. I know I'll be having dinner tonight. My grandfather sold the farm and moved to town to become a tool maker. He had a glimpse of the future. My father worked for the same company as my grandfather for almost all his life. I have held jobs with nine different companies in my life. Times are different now though, there is no loyalty companies have to their employees. There's nothing wrong with a good burger, but one can always hope for a good steak.

Yes, the wealthy will always need maintenance on things. But I don't want to see the middle class of this country disappear like it has been either. The two class society structure of "haves" and have nots" is making a strong comeback in the US. There is in increasing lack of middle ground every day it seems.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 03, 2010, 10:07:48 AM
Here is my point.... how much of a difference will there be between the haves and havenots if ...say a doctor.... trades an appendectomy for a motor rebuild? Or a teacher works for say, a new roof. What is the true value of your niche? Picture a country... Oh my.... my Grand parent's world... where service and goods were traded. Those with actual money..... were in their own world. Wealth is measured many different ways. A rich man needs food..... he has gold and the farmer has food....what is the value of the food???
 
I want my prodigy to do better than I did...no arguement but.... I also want them to be able to sustain themselves. Do not rely on a handout, "tax break", rebate, stimulus etc. If you want to Gamble go to Mountaineer or Vegas..... buy a Lottery ticket. I know 3 millionaires who won lottery... one (multi millionaire) hasn't spent it all yet but has distant relatives he never knew before, to help him, one is trying to keep it together and one lost the pot to pee in and the window to throw it out of. I just shake my head. I think the haves and havenots are more measured by what is inside rather than outside. LOL remember Scrooge????
 
 
Simply put, I want my legacies to have a better life than I do. Not that there is anything wrong with mine. I know I'll be having dinner tonight. My grandfather sold the farm and moved to town to become a tool maker. He had a glimpse of the future. My father worked for the same company as my grandfather for almost all his life. I have held jobs with nine different companies in my life. Times are different now though, there is no loyalty companies have to their employees. There's nothing wrong with a good burger, but one can always hope for a good steak.

Yes, the wealthy will always need maintenance on things. But I don't want to see the middle class of this country disappear like it has been either. The two class society structure of "haves" and have nots" is making a strong comeback in the US. There is in increasing lack of middle ground every day it seems.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 03, 2010, 10:19:29 AM
You're going under the assumption the farmer actually owns any land to grow food on. I don't have any argument with the sustainability portion of what you said. Any successful society has always been a series of symbiotic relationships. I do worry about how these relationships are changing though.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 03, 2010, 12:28:51 PM
I only mentioned the farmer as one example.... carpenters, mechanics, plumbers usually own the tools they use. I have to wonder what a Doctor would do if...if they could no longer practice medicine.... A carpenter can still build.... doctor..hmmmm regulations and laws... just to practice. Once you can do with your hands, it is hard to take that away, short of cutting your hands off and giving you brain damage. Outside the city limits, someone who can build, etc. almost has carte blaunche. Again... success and better life can be a debatable situation.
 
 
I only worry about the relationships changes when one thinks they can live without the other. That is what creates a nasty situation from ignoring needs to outright revolution.
 
 
 
 
You're going under the assumption the farmer actually owns any land to grow food on. I don't have any argument with the sustainability portion of what you said. Any successful society has always been a series of symbiotic relationships. I do worry about how these relationships are changing though.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on August 03, 2010, 02:40:27 PM
Does this go under Obama or oil spill?  ???
 
The Secretary of the Navy will be in town (meaning here in the Tampabay area) this evening for a "hearing" on the oil spill (I think the writer of the article I'm reading meant forum or some other open discussion). Our maintenance department had to contact an elevator company OFF CONTRACT (at the campus leadership's request), at the overtime rate, plus travel, just to have an elevator tech standing by in case the notoriously glitchy elevator acts up. The custodial department was told to forgo their normal rounds yesterday to concentrate on the buildings the Naval Secretary will be in/just walking through while he's here tonight. (Regarding some of the comments in the article questioning the location - the Fish and Wildlife Commission's campus over here is *central command* for the logistics of the oil spill cleanup and recovery for the state of Florida...and some of us have known about this visit since last week, but they just made the public announcement today - it was on-again, off-again for several days).
 
*sigh* Bigwigs always throw everything into chaos...
 
http://http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/got-thoughts-on-oil-spill-obama-official-visits-st-pete-tonight/1112754 (http://http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/got-thoughts-on-oil-spill-obama-official-visits-st-pete-tonight/1112754)
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on August 03, 2010, 04:11:54 PM
"I see a time where a degree in geology and music may be moot."
 
Music theory, yes, I see that being one of those Liberal Arts degrees that aren't "real world applicable" (see also: Philosophy). But Geology? There will *always* be earthquakes - and the need to further study and better understand the topography and geological activity of the planet. The USGS is a big program, and a decent sized employer in my region. The ongoing research projects include mapping and computer modeling. Cool stuff. Some of those Arts & Sciences majors do lead to actual jobs specific to the course of study - but I've also seen some Anthropology majors who have shown amazing business acumen that outpaced the tons of MBA's that are still getting churned out left and right by the business schools. Because they understand fundametally how *people* work.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 03, 2010, 05:24:15 PM
In your area???? Well we surely want all politicians to be voted out ...except ours. I am only remarking on the priorities. We seem to NEED everything.... yet even women are now opting to birth at home.... without the "doctors and midwives". Hmmmmm stupid? We have all come a long way but we seem to want every step we make to be everyone elses fault but our own. Malpractice, frivolous lawsuits, our childrens education... If you can make a living with music or studying rocks or earth movements...even weather... more power to you but I think in the end....they may not be that high on the "food chain". And I won't even remark much on the Billions we as a society have spent to improve and educational system that hasn't given  the "bang for the buck" in our ratings with countries that spend much less and the average scores haven't markedly increased since the 60's. Something is wrong..... if we do it right... new priorities may point it out.
 
"Because they understand fundametally how *people* work". Hmmmm interesting....
 
Paternal Grand Mother lived 102 years
Paternal Grand Father....99 years
Maternal Grand Mother....80
Maternal Grand Mother....80
 
Not one HS Diploma or College degree in the bunch. THOSE people knew exactly how people "work". Even my Father with a 3rd grade education being born in Jan. 1892, could figure out any man or woman .... it was and still is called "common sense". As a society, we have lost an edge. My hope is that we find it before long.
 
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 03, 2010, 05:31:03 PM
2 Maternal Grandmothers?! 

Pretty modern for the times I'd say!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on August 03, 2010, 09:19:32 PM
Well, if you're talking about total societal collapse (?), there is a big difference sometimes between one's vocation and their survival skills. But I live in an urban area, so regardless of my dedication to self-sufficiency and my (micro) homesteading, if anything really bad happens...I'm pretty much screwed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 04, 2010, 07:48:08 AM
Would and should have known you would pick up a mistake.... GRAND FATHER....
 
 
uote author=lifefeedsonlife link=topic=1513.msg31520#msg31520 date=1280871063]
2 Maternal Grandmothers?! 

Pretty modern for the times I'd say!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 04, 2010, 08:06:13 AM
I wasn't talking total colapse.... I was talking and thinking a return to real personal and economic values. We have gotten to the point where we think success and "doing better" is owning a 1/4 million dollar home and 2 cars to whatever title is deposited in front of your name.... like Mr. Mrs, Miss etc are not good enough. Just what is the concept of "doing better" to you??? Not just you ....it was a question I pose for thought. To me... today.... it is that my Grand Children need for nothing and can get some wants and their parents are able to do this on their own. Add to that, being happy in who they are.
 
My Father would have expected no less from me. I never recalled that he went on vacations so he worked constantly. For the most part, his wife, my mother, was a stay at home Mom and took care of me and later my younger sister. At the time our NEEDS were basic. There was no cars in my family and we didn't get a tv until the week he retired. Bills were simple...pay as you go... with house payment, tax/ins., gas, electric, water and a single rotary phone. Now count your assorted bills...from sewer to trash to cable to cell and computer. Sometimes just living today becomes complicated to the point that we either HAVE to lose the in home mom or a second job needed and jobs means an hour drive to get to. If you can do it and not have to much difficulty.... you ARE doing better than your parents. Or are you one to chase down the McMansion, newest forms of communication and sets of wheels...... I always refer back to NEEDS and WANTS and the intelligence to know the difference.
 
 
Well, if you're talking about total societal collapse (?), there is a big difference sometimes between one's vocation and their survival skills. But I live in an urban area, so regardless of my dedication to self-sufficiency and my (micro) homesteading, if anything really bad happens...I'm pretty much screwed.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 04, 2010, 08:32:31 AM
Lifetime - gotta agree with you on that point. My wife and I scaled back so she could stay home with the kids. We felt it was more importnat for them to have that type of stability as opposed to a more materially oriented lifestyle. Between she and I working - we were able to buy more shit - but were tired as hell - and in the end - the kids would literally be raised by other folks than us.

Which is another reason we're choosing the homeschooling route.

It's a choice. One that I'm grateful I can afford to make. It's hard though sometimes . . . we don't have money for vacations or anything, but it's not something we whine about, because we know it's a choice. We're rich in other ways . . . ultimately more important ones in my opinion.

Was kiddin' about the grandmothers thing ya know. Some typos are just kinda funny.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on August 04, 2010, 09:24:33 AM
Everyone is different in how they measure "status". Some people are really into trying to impress others or make them envious of their "lifestyle". I never grew up in that environment - in fact, until I was eight years old my fractured little family either was on welfare living in section 8 housing or crowded into a two-bedroom apartment with members of my extended family while my mother worked to get back on her feet after we left (more or less fled) PA. Then my mom met and married someone with a strong work ethic who was very good at managing their finances, and my parents were frugal and lived well within their means while I was growing up. They live pretty well now, and can afford most of their "wants". My in-laws are different...I feel like they have "Keeping up with the Joneses" and entitlement issues. Which could be why they overextended on a mortgage that they had to default on while they piddled away a large amount of money from an inheritance (that they have literally *nothing* to show from) and just came out of bankruptcy proceedings. They haven't made a mortgage payment in well over a year, but can somehow still afford to go out to dinner a couple nights a week, attend MLB games a couple times a month, get new cell phones, take little vacation trips and stay at hotels on the beach. They had a "lifestyle" prior to their current economic problems (which had been brewing for a long, long, time, actually), and are very reluctant to scale that back. I guess they can afford it even more now, living in a house for nothing and all of their debt forgiven. My husband and I have friends who make what we consider strange financial decisions, and we watch as they choose to buy a Wii to make their kids "happy", then get their only working car repoed when they can't make the payment. We live within our means, and all of our bills are paid on time with some left over, and even with my husband's love of gadgets and bright, shiny new tech, our finances aren't that tight so that all of our needs are met, and some of our wants are covered. We both work (on occassion one or the other of us has worked two jobs for extra spending money or turned a "hobby" into a part-time paying gig), but if one of us were in the  position of being out of work suddenly, either by choice or circumstance, we have some vanity expenses that we could easily drop and resources that we could access to cover bills. It would be tight, and probably stressful, but we've figured out that it's doable. Thankfully, I've never been in the position (yet) of losing a job unexpectedly or had to borrow money from anyone, let alone from my parents, although they made it possible for my husband and I to get a house when we were in our early twenties by offering us an amazing deal. We had to qualify for loan and pay the mortgage ourselves, of course...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 04, 2010, 10:37:03 AM
Hey..... my skin isn't that thick LOL but...will say...if Gramma was alive and saw that...we would both be beat.  :huh:
 
 
Lifetime - gotta agree with you on that point. My wife and I scaled back so she could stay home with the kids. We felt it was more importnat for them to have that type of stability as opposed to a more materially oriented lifestyle. Between she and I working - we were able to buy more shit - but were tired as hell - and in the end - the kids would literally be raised by other folks than us.

Which is another reason we're choosing the homeschooling route.

It's a choice. One that I'm grateful I can afford to make. It's hard though sometimes . . . we don't have money for vacations or anything, but it's not something we whine about, because we know it's a choice. We're rich in other ways . . . ultimately more important ones in my opinion.

Was kiddin' about the grandmothers thing ya know. Some typos are just kinda funny.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 04, 2010, 10:56:31 AM
My wife cannot work due to severe fibro, So she is a domestic engineer of sorts. We have what we need with a few wants in there as well. Out lifestyle is mostly comfortable. I can't complain much about it really. I would like to leave this world with the knowledge that my kids have the ability to support themselves, care for themselves and those in their lives. I would also like to leave them with something for a rainy day. However the reality is that as our lifespans increase this will become a near impossibility.

So did anybody see that Iran first said the attack on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was work of Israel. They later denied that it even happened. Do they seriously think we are going to believe Israel would go all that way to lob a grenade at him?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on August 04, 2010, 11:38:28 AM
If it had been Israel, it wouldn't have been a grenade. And it wouldn't have failed.  :-X


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 07, 2010, 05:34:43 PM
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs116.ash2/39156_149205818428615_140905385925325_507316_2790276_n.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 07, 2010, 06:15:12 PM
I find that appointment keeping in the fine tradition of American nepotism and cronyism, which is - apparently - change we can believe in.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 07, 2010, 07:12:03 PM
I find that appointment keeping in the fine tradition of American nepotism and cronyism, which is - apparently - change we can believe in.

I guess I should of tossed my name in the hat then.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on August 08, 2010, 11:36:59 PM
I have two young children that are going to be asking me what should I do when I grow up? The choice will be theirs, but the question is going to come to me eventually....  So what do I tell them?

One way or another MP, give them as many experiences as you can. Get them a college education. As bad as this economy is the unemployment rate for college grads is 4.4%. For women college grads it's 4%. That shows skills are important. Healthcare and Technology are actually hiring.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 09, 2010, 08:36:52 AM
I agree with you. In fact.... if you are going for a tech job with formal education... let it be in the fields of medicine...not so much a doctor unless you want to be one for reasons other than filling the bank. Our population is going to come to a point soon where those over 60 may be equal to if not more than those under 60. This equates in a MARKET.... MEDICAL CARE AND PRODUCTS to keep us ALIVE and as well as possible. It will become an industry. Short of the manufacturing of Soylent Green.... it may be a good vocational choice.
 
What I am seeing.... Be prepared to take pay cuts or lower wage to get a job.... this is a double edged knife at best...
 
Hire more people at the lower wages??? Well that means no increase and in some cases LESS TAXES at all levels which....now follow me..... means the taxes will (have to) increase to supply an increasing population with Government services. So let me see.... make less money, pay more tax, standard of living goes which way? Employment/unemployment numbers are a smoke screen at best. "More jobs created!" Lets look at this.... say a county ( you can find this info on the net) had 100,000 jobs. They lose 40,000 but got back say.... 60,000. Ok we now have 120,000 people working... But say that what we lost was good factory jobs at say paid wages of $30 per hour full time ( 40 hours) are now $12-$14 per hour 32 hours ( considered full time in Gov't figures.) What was the gain, what is the real tax base and how much taxes are lost ( to be increased later)? and How do you think that affects the standard of living. Less wages mean buying less or less expensive. Less for housing, clothing, food and if this admin doesn't work right... medical.
 
All of this shows we have MORE jobs but...what are the real total values as in spendable income do they actually indicate. A while back...several decades ago whjen the Steel Mills hit the skids in our area, I did a search.... we did have MORE jobs but.... they generated about 3/4 the actual income we had. A plus???? or is it a beancounter's dream???
 
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on August 09, 2010, 09:59:00 AM
I just drove from Fl to VA to MI to TN to Fl. I couldn't believe how many jobs were available. I actually saw a sign at a grocery distribution center that said 'NOW HIRING call xxx-xxxxx' facing the interstate. Detroit is rebounding and rehiring autoworkers and parts manufacturers, and a lot of good paying jobs out there. Nashville is BOOMING. Ky not so much. Va is a bit depressed in the rural areas but everyone I spoke to there had a job or could find one.
I didn't go through PA but it seems from y'all's comments that it's best to steer clear.
btw, still working 3 jobs  ;D  and I don't have any competition at any of them.
The economy is catching up, and the oil spill is under control. I'm going to smile a bit and hug someone.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 09, 2010, 11:50:07 AM
Good to hear Tife! Good to hear.

I just entered the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee contest to have dinner with President Obama and Speaker Pelosi in Los Angeles! (No campaign contribution necessary of course.) I hope I win!!!!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 09, 2010, 12:22:56 PM
Here is my point..... specific to Lordstown and to Delphi-Packard in Ohio... They call shifts BACK..... not "new jobs" and any "new hires and the old in some circumstance who opted to stay... at a lower pay scale. Hire all you want but the Statistical Value in dollars is still much lower than it was.... When you take those jobs in the service industry.... how many of them do you need to work to take care of your family.... 4 years ago...maybe one good paying job...now as in your case...3 jobs for one person.... not 3 people. In your world.... 900 jobs would need 300 people...is that a plus???? I know when getting started in life... you have to start at the bottom with all the benefits to be gained as you go along. Now we have people 55+ years old back in the market but.... now with children, home and maybe a trunk load of medical issues. Somehow...not the same as when 20, no family to support, house payment and usually healthy as a horse. Is this the progress we want???
 
 
I just drove from Fl to VA to MI to TN to Fl. I couldn't believe how many jobs were available. I actually saw a sign at a grocery distribution center that said 'NOW HIRING call xxx-xxxxx' facing the interstate. Detroit is rebounding and rehiring autoworkers and parts manufacturers, and a lot of good paying jobs out there. Nashville is BOOMING. Ky not so much. Va is a bit depressed in the rural areas but everyone I spoke to there had a job or could find one.
I didn't go through PA but it seems from y'all's comments that it's best to steer clear.
btw, still working 3 jobs  ;D  and I don't have any competition at any of them.
The economy is catching up, and the oil spill is under control. I'm going to smile a bit and hug someone.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on August 09, 2010, 03:33:12 PM
Give me a flippin' solution then. What would be better, NOT call all the laid off workers back?!? Is the issue getting people back to work or just complaining about the current administration? For God's sake, you have to start the recovery somewhere...and we can't just force the companies to hire people back at union wages...or can we? Is that what you are advocating? because THAT sounds a whole lot like the 'socialism' you tend to complain about.
Seriously, it's cool to be the 'curmudgeon' sometimes but if it's all the time, you just sound like an angry bitter old man.
I still look for rainbows. And ponies. ;D  I've been kicked in the teeth quite a bit over the past couple of years, quite spectacularly I might add, I'll rehash the pain if you like. But I won't let it change my outlook on life. Maybe if more people in Western PA 'looked on the bright side of life', more people would stay. I left for that selfsame attitude. RECENTLY. Happy Happy Joy Joy...
 
The people of Detroit, and Nashville, and many other towns I went through DIDN'T give up because 'their' guy didn't win. They just kept plugging away until things turned around. I was just making an observation that things looked remarkably better in those places since the last time I visited.
...and I work 3 jobs to pay for the 'extras' that make life bearable...the primary job covers everything...and nobody WANTS the jobs I am doing. I didn't take them away from anyone. I was asked by the employers to stay on because no other qualified candidates existed or applied. They pay $15 and $9.50 an hour. Not bad for jobs that nobody else wants to do.
 
I'm tired of the complaining, can't you tell  ::)  ...and the current batch of Republicans down here are offering NO solutions, just attacks. Same with the Tea Party...and the backlash against illegals. All from the right. All I am asking is for a civil discourse but I know I won't get it. SO I just put my nose to the grindstone and try to block out the cacaphony of mean people...
 
*off soapbox*  :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on August 09, 2010, 06:29:39 PM
My favorite line to throw out at work when we are short staffed (always) and people are bitching (always)......"please be grateful you have a job to come to and bitch about"....shuts them up for a while (always).  I hate listening to people bitch at work.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on August 09, 2010, 11:59:41 PM
TiFe, I'm seeing pretty much the same thing you are. Aside from residential/commercial construction there is optimism out there.
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 10, 2010, 07:47:39 AM
Ok.... I have no real solution ...are you one of those who feels.... JUST DO SOMETHING???? Hmmmm maybe look like a hamburger in front of a hungry Lion... just do sumthin...
 
Check it out.... When I said they bring employees back or hire them at almost half what they got before..my point.... LOWER their wages.... but they forgot one thing..... to lower the damned prices... DOH. Large Corporations are sitting on fat coffers as we speak...check the profits since this all happened. Why?... well they have laid off and are not investing in workers, their choice... they are not expanding their ventures, their choice... So in doing this... their "worth" rises monetarily. But...if they want to pay their workers less.... who becomes the customers for their product... if they can no longer afford to buy. Even Henry Ford recognized that he needed to price his product so that even HIS workers could afford it. And that is just the private sector..
 
 
Add to that... making less means paying less taxes.... unless the tax rates are...what.... raised. Even less disposible income for customers. What I am saying is that this .... what we have now... is a Catch 22. Less income... less ability to continue to buy,... less tax revenue,.... MORE taxes needed...back to step one and two. My question is, who blinks first? Personally I don't see prices coming DOWN as opposed to a slow attemt to get back to the REAL values. I also see the public sector laying off to include safety forces...and it is in a time I have seen an increased NEED for them. Infrastructure is the mantra of those want ing more money.... no mentioned that it WAS there and was not being used the right way or for some other program. Even the Educational system has become a money pit with very little improvement from 4 or 5 decades ago... just check the money going in and the SAT levels.... not so much a program of bang for the buck.
 
I am saying we squandered our money in both the private and public sector for so long, that now any supposed correction is super painful. Moreso to those who lost the income as opposed to those who aren't going to invest in what is preceived as a black hole.
 
Education wise... we all flunked. Math... basic math.... If you have $10... logic says.... you save at least $1 ...10% minimum. (Pay yourself first) them you pay your bills and IF some is left... enjoy something. What we did.... Earn $10, spend $20...and we expected ...WHAT??? And the WE I mention is both PRIVATE and PUBLIC. Our Government is doing this as we speak. So, when you have dug yourself into a hole you can't climb out of, don't bitch but for God's sake...QUIT DIGGING.!!!!
 
We can't force companies to do a damned thing, we do have a tool.... talk with the dollars you DO have... Quit buying crap you want and focus on the NEED. It is only a matter of time that the supplier will notice the overpriced "bananas" sitting on the shelf and getting black. But no... we see a house we like and bid out our anus to get it...thus paying MORE than it's real value and causing the neighbors to think they can sell their homes at the inflated value as well. Now we have forclosures up the sphincter, people in underwater mortgages and fingers pointing everywhere. I remember when the NEW DODGE VIPER came on the market.... touted as a $35,000 sports car. Well that lasted until the first one hit the dealer.... people told them they would pay $50,000 to own one... out the window, the thought of a reasonably priced sports car. Who did this??? Well the buyer with more money than brains and the Company laughing all the way to the bank. A car set to sell buy the company has just given them an extra approx. 40% clear profit. So now the 35K now goes for 50K across the board. The American way, the free market... yup.... but now look who is crying and expecting the handouts... We put tax money into the Chrysler Corp and now we look for another 99 weeks of unemployment. Who really did this? Look in the mirror. "Greed is good".... until it is YOU who are being eaten by it. Simple MATH.
 
Hmmm How is Detroit doing now??? And again... not picking on you for working 3 jobs... my point is that those 3 jobs are counted as 3 jobs with 3 different people. ... not one person working all 3. I refer to the Bean Counters and Liars figure and figures lie. I have a friend who OWNS a music store... he sells instruments, teaches people how to play them and he also plays in a band. Now... let's see... is that ONE job or three jobs and how is it counted in employment records. Also, my friend... though retired from the military.. does these jobs to pay the overhead and resupply/expansion with little actual income... His wife is an "unpaid" employee. He keeps his head above water but he also knows where he can put his fruits of his labor. Now... he is doing what he seems to enjoy and God Bless him. He seems satisfied. I know he can't live on just those 3 "jobs" without the meager military retirement. He knows his limit. Simple Math.
 
 
 
 
 
Give me a flippin' solution then. What would be better, NOT call all the laid off workers back?!? Is the issue getting people back to work or just complaining about the current administration? For God's sake, you have to start the recovery somewhere...and we can't just force the companies to hire people back at union wages...or can we? Is that what you are advocating? because THAT sounds a whole lot like the 'socialism' you tend to complain about.
Seriously, it's cool to be the 'curmudgeon' sometimes but if it's all the time, you just sound like an angry bitter old man.
I still look for rainbows. And ponies. ;D  I've been kicked in the teeth quite a bit over the past couple of years, quite spectacularly I might add, I'll rehash the pain if you like. But I won't let it change my outlook on life. Maybe if more people in Western PA 'looked on the bright side of life', more people would stay. I left for that selfsame attitude. RECENTLY. Happy Happy Joy Joy...
 
The people of Detroit, and Nashville, and many other towns I went through DIDN'T give up because 'their' guy didn't win. They just kept plugging away until things turned around. I was just making an observation that things looked remarkably better in those places since the last time I visited.
...and I work 3 jobs to pay for the 'extras' that make life bearable...the primary job covers everything...and nobody WANTS the jobs I am doing. I didn't take them away from anyone. I was asked by the employers to stay on because no other qualified candidates existed or applied. They pay $15 and $9.50 an hour. Not bad for jobs that nobody else wants to do.
 
I'm tired of the complaining, can't you tell  ::)  ...and the current batch of Republicans down here are offering NO solutions, just attacks. Same with the Tea Party...and the backlash against illegals. All from the right. All I am asking is for a civil discourse but I know I won't get it. SO I just put my nose to the grindstone and try to block out the cacaphony of mean people...
 
*off soapbox*  :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 10, 2010, 08:52:31 AM
In paragraph 1 - I thought you were advocating for the pay / price czar for a second there . . . !

Risk and profit motive are necessary for innovation and growth. It seems apparent that sensible regulation is needed to prevent stupid greed. Avarice is not good. Over-regulation is not good.

So - it would seem a balanced solution would be to have simple non-loopholed regulations with real swift / enforceable penalties in place to effectively reduce stupid greed while allowing for enough risk and freedom to promote innovation and growth.

Questions are - is our bureaucratic infrastructure making such sensible reform impossible? Are the politicians we have willing or able to think and act along these lines? How much are we going to have to tear down in order to effectively re-build?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on August 10, 2010, 09:00:41 AM
ouch. As usual Life, you made me think and my brain hurts.  ;D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on August 10, 2010, 03:35:17 PM
High Paying Jobs Going Unfilled (http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/110277/some-firms-struggle-to-hire-despite-high-unemployment)

I think this article summarizes pretty well what we all have been talking about. I think everyone here has offered excellent points: It seems like there needs to be some 'retooling' of the workforce.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on August 11, 2010, 08:31:11 PM
In my e-mail today:
 
The ANT & The GRASSHOPPER
Two Different Versions ... Two Different Morals
 
 
OLD VERSION
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
 
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.
 
Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.
 
The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.
 
MORAL OF THE OLD STORY:
Be responsible for yourself!
MODERN VERSION
The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.
The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.
Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.  CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.
America is stunned by the sharp contrast.
How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?
Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green...'
ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, "We shall overcome."
Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray for the grasshopper's sake.
President Obama condemns the ant and blames President Bush, President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper's plight.
Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.
Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.
The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper.
The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't maintain it.
The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again.
The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and peaceful, neighborhood.
The entire Nation collapses bringing the rest of the free world with it.
MORAL OF THE STORY:
Be careful how you vote in 2010.
I’ve sent this to you because I believe that you are an ant 
not a grasshopper!
Make sure that you pass this on to other ants.
Don’t bother sending it on to any grasshoppers because they wouldn’t understand it, anyway.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 11, 2010, 09:17:05 PM
This is an article asking the question (in India) is food a right for the poor?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/world/asia/09food.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/world/asia/09food.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1)

The question is more than just for India though. Is food an absolute human right? Meaning - is anyone and everyone entitled to food?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 12, 2010, 07:43:49 AM
I've been watching some of the asian news animations as of late. They're pretty funny (even though I can't understand a word they are saying), and they do cut to the chase sometimes. I saw this one today and just thought I'd share.

第一夫人蜜雪兒豪華假期顧人怨 -- Michelle's Spanish Vacation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAfdaDVBDto&feature=player_embedded#ws)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 12, 2010, 08:07:09 AM
*sarcasm on*

Well - that video wouldn't pass the racist litmus test . . . cuz everyone knows that Asians are racist.

*sarcasm off*



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 12, 2010, 08:25:59 AM
WKBN radio is discussing Section 8 and the need to dump it as we speak.... "corporate welfare" and a program that allows scumlords to over price their rents for Government subsidy.
 
Original concept.... to enable the poorer amongst us to live in "normal neighborhoods". What seems to happen.... the "normal Neighborhoods" with an abundance of Sec. 8 housing seem to have turned into the High Crime, poorly maintained homes. In Sharon, the values of homes have fell like a rock in water in many areas here. I have seen my own neighborhood fall into the "rut". We see the police and fire department more in ONE year than we did in decades before. More abandoned properties and grass that seems to need cut by the city. They removed a playground on the corner of North and Fourth to build Housing. So now..kids have to play in the street... Is this Progress? In maybe 20 years, it won't matter to me.... dirt nap time but..... what will be left for those still trying to maintain??? I think we need to re-evaluate the program. Do a better job of checking out the Land Lords as well as those who rent. If you have a drug crime, or for that matter, involved in any way in an illegal activity... you are not only moved out but.... the Landlord needs maybe ONE warning. If this happens again.... perhaps a temporary loss of ability to be in the Sec. 8 program. We need landlords as well as renters involved in the values of a good, safe neighborhood. And yes..... I am not above putting out a family...kids and all if the "ADULTS" are involved in bad activities. If their children meant enough to THEM, maybe they wouldn't put them in that situation. Or better yet... use birth control. We live in a society without shame or pride.
 
 
Housing Crisis...
 
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/11/thousands-wait-to-apply-f_n_678840.html[/url] ([url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/11/thousands-wait-to-apply-f_n_678840.html[/url])


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 21, 2010, 11:42:09 AM
http://undoctrination.org/2010/07/24/the-compassion-of-freedom/ (http://undoctrination.org/2010/07/24/the-compassion-of-freedom/)

Please take a moment to read this article. It illustrates WHY a Socialist approach to governance really doesn't work well. In a socialist structure - there is no personal responsibility t be your brother's keeper - it is society's. A faceless they becomes responsible for administering compassion through your tax dollars. Which effectively removes you from the equation - but still sates the conscience - right?

Bullshit.

Freedom demands personal responsibility. It demands character. It demands 'doing the right thing' so freedom can continue. Being free together is far different than being bound together.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 21, 2010, 02:50:18 PM
That's why I think the Pepsi Refresh projects are interesting - because the only "sacrifice" it requires on your part to do good is to click a button. When doing good consists of nothing more than clicking a button . . . something ain't quite right . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on August 22, 2010, 12:13:40 PM
I haven't seen the official government response yet on the picture below. Again, there always seems to be something going on over in this part of world doesn't there? I'll be curious to see what comes out of the white house statement-wise.

(http://media.voanews.com/images/480*347/ap_iran_karrar_ahmadinejad_22aug10.jpg) (http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/Iran-Shows-Off-Unmanned-Long-Range-Bomber-101251954.html)
Click the picture for the article


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on August 24, 2010, 11:57:51 PM
This graphic was in the Washington Post, and is a comparison of the proposed tax cut plans. The republican one includes continueing the Bush tax cuts. what it doesn't show is the effect on the deficit, since both the proposals are for cutting revenue, but not spending.
(http://dontmesswithtaxes.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8345157c669e20133f329cb48970b-800wi) 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 25, 2010, 07:27:38 AM
I am still trying to wrap my head around how we figure that a multi-billion dollar business is killing us with, say....5% but less than 10% profit but a less than a multi-million dollar business isn't killing us when they get the business standard of 10%.
 
Percentage is what I look for in "profit" on the money I put in any type of interest bearing account or agreement.... not the monetary amount. I know what I make if I "bet" $1000 in the game or if I put in $100,000. The percentage is my profit or loss.
 
So now I wonder where all the people who made OVER 10% on heir "investments" were on this before the market tanked... Hmmmmm very loud silence out there...All of you who invested in the Dot Coms under Clinton didn't peep until the Coms tanked.
 
This all is over "who's ox got gored." Always has been, always will be. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to pay $4/gallon for Gasoline again and I don't want to pay $1000/month for basic Health Insurance. What we peons are doing ,is eating each other as the rest watch amusingly.
 
IMHO
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on August 25, 2010, 07:32:36 AM
Yep.

It's good sport.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on August 25, 2010, 07:52:27 AM
But for WHOM???? I was never really interested in sports over honesty and life.
 
 
Yep.

It's good sport.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 03, 2010, 05:22:55 PM
Hard to believe my eyes, but now there will be another stimulus package?

From The Associated Press
By ERICA WERNER (AP) – 1 hour ago

WASHINGTON — Eager to jumpstart the economy ahead of crucial midterm elections, President Barack Obama said Friday he intends to unveil a new package of proposals, likely including tax cuts and targeted spending, to spark job growth.

Obama spoke in the Rose Garden after the August jobs report came out better than expected, showing the private sector adding 67,000 new jobs last month and revising upward the numbers from June and July. But unemployment ticked upward to 9.6 percent as more people entered the job market, and the president said it wasn't good enough.

"That's why we need to take further steps to create jobs and keep the economy growing, including extending tax cuts for the middle class and investing in the areas of our economy where the potential for job growth is greatest," Obama said.

"We are confident that we are moving in the right direction, but we want to keep this recovery moving stronger and accelerate the job growth that's needed so desperately."

Administration officials say a big new stimulus bill like last year's $814 billion measure is not in the offing - nervous lawmakers looking to November's balloting would not be expected to approve an expensive new measure. But Obama said he'd be proposing a new set of ideas next week. He's likely to detail them during a speech on the economy Wednesday in Cleveland, midway through an economy-focused week capped by a rare White House news conference.

Obama's package could include a number of provisions that have languished in Congress for much of the year, including infrastructure bonds for municipalities and extensions for a series of tax breaks for businesses and individuals that expired at the end of 2009. Democratic leaders are considering making one of the tax breaks permanent, for businesses that invest in research and development.

They are also considering extending a law passed in March that exempts companies that hire unemployed workers from paying Social Security taxes on those workers through December. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., has proposed extending the exemption an additional six months.

Obama is continuing to prod the Senate to pass a bill that calls for about $12 billion in tax breaks for small businesses and a $30 billion fund to help unfreeze small business lending. Republicans have likened the bill to the unpopular bailout of the financial industry. And the president wants to make permanent the portion of George W. Bush's tax cuts affecting the middle class.

The House has already passed many of the provisions, but they have stalled in the Senate because Republicans and Democrats could not agree on how to pay for them.

Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Reid hoped to be able to get the small business measure through once the Senate goes back in session later this month but the prospect for other ideas was cloudier. Moreover, some of the ideas are relatively small bore, so even if they did pass in the next month or two it's unlikely they'd make a real dent in the economy before the elections.

Departing White House economist Christina Romer told The Associated Press that the new proposals would be "targeted measures aimed at particular problems or incentivizing a particular area of the economy." Romer is leaving her post as chair of the president's Council of Economic Advisers on Friday to return to the University of California, Berkley.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 03, 2010, 11:45:57 PM
They gotta loosen up bank credit to small businesses somehow.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 04, 2010, 07:14:04 AM
Bad part of this WHOLE THING..... The banks have the money to loan but..... until they are sure of what is in store for the businesses with this administration... it will hold the money...INTENDED to be lent but...
 
Now...the businesses ....especially those who have been "helped" and some of the SCHOOL SYSTEMS who either received money, are sitting on the money and not hiring or using the money in a way not intended, because ....oh my... back to the original reason stated in the previous paragraph...." until they are sure of what is in store for the businesses/ recipient, with this administration". Taxes, healthcare, employment, cap and tax...etc.
 
School systems who originally received monies to keep or call back teachers, decided to not do that in lieu of paying off bills owed. Busisnesses do have profit, but some got that profit by laying off or downsizing.... less wages to pay as well as payments into benefit programs. So now they wait......
 
 
They gotta loosen up bank credit to small businesses somehow.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 04, 2010, 11:39:38 PM
The same banks that made those incredibly risky Home Mortgage loans, also made equally unwise Commercial Real-estate loans for the same reason. High risk-High profit.
TARP allowed them to stabilize their Home Mortgage business to some extent, but I read some time ago in one of the Business Mags that of the $300 Billion Of Commercial Loans coming due in the next year, $40% are in default or in big time trouble. SO while these banks say they are not loaning because of uncertainty with the Admin. The truth is they have a shitload of bad paper, and they are not ready to admit it. Blame someone else!
The financial system of this country is in very fragile shape.   


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 05, 2010, 07:30:40 AM
I think the Banks have the money to loan but, having it in their possession adds to the portfolios.... much like the value of a Corporation when they include the money in a retirement fund. I also think the money that the banks got, was earmarked to ONLY be lent in the manner specified.... not to cover thier losses.... much like money earmarked to beautify a street in a town that is bancrupt... the money cannot be used for any other purpose. The banks are scare that they may ...yet again do some bad lending. Check out how close they look at financial records just for someone to buy a car or home now. If you think your Credit Score was important back then.... even moreso now... Don't have anything below 700 or if you DO get a loan.... the interest will roll your stomach. This ain't Kansas anymore TOTO. The game has changed.
 
 
The same banks that made those incredibly risky Home Mortgage loans, also made equally unwise Commercial Real-estate loans for the same reason. High risk-High profit.
TARP allowed them to stabilize their Home Mortgage business to some extent, but I read some time ago in one of the Business Mags that of the $300 Billion Of Commercial Loans coming due in the next year, $40% are in default or in big time trouble. SO while these banks say they are not loaning because of uncertainty with the Admin. The truth is they have a shitload of bad paper, and they are not ready to admit it. Blame someone else!
The financial system of this country is in very fragile shape.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 07, 2010, 02:13:39 PM
I just ran across this and it was to good to not share.

(http://visboo.com/img/31082010/71590.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 07, 2010, 03:59:26 PM
...flipping around the raidio dial...NPR did back to back pieces on how to weather the housing market and answered calls about different situations....Rush was bashing Obama about being a Muslim.
 
Figures... ::)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 07, 2010, 04:04:38 PM
Though he has some valid points I don't put a whole lot of stock in what he says. That's probably why I don't listen to him. I prefer to form my own opinions about things rather than listen to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Michael Moore and other similar "personalities." Plus I have more time to do the things I like rather than take someone elses opinions for my own.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on September 07, 2010, 05:56:34 PM
Rush is admittedly an entertainer. So why ARE we suckers for entertainers??


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 07, 2010, 09:44:06 PM
I was flipping around. I occasionally stop on Beck or Hannity and it's the same thing. My point was that NPR, considered Leftist, was offering solutions, while Rush/Hannity/Beck et al, considered the conservative right, only offer criticism and ridicule.
 
Who are the Republicans putting out there to run against Obama? Mitt? Huckabee? Gingrich? Beck? Palin? Seriously? Just keep complainin'...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 07, 2010, 09:52:45 PM
I think the thing people aren't 'getting' is that Republicans and Democrats have 'shared' power since the late 1880's or so. Fact of the matter is - when you break it down - they are both beholden to the folks that give them money and when you trace the money back to its origins - those folks are the ones that hold the true power . . .

Who "owns" the Federal Reserve Bank? And how is it linked to other monetary entities in the world?

The choice between the lesser of two evils is not a choice.

Joe Klein had an interesting take on it in the latest issue of TIME magazine. (Page 29 for folks who have it or can get a copy.)

The only problem with Democracy is that the 'public' is a fickle entity subject to its emotional upheavals sometimes moreso than an individual. A riot can cause more turmoil than one angry man . . . but then again, one angry man with some power can do a lot too . . . . 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 07, 2010, 10:53:07 PM
I saw that klein article too. I liked the first 2 sentences.
 
The economy has been the main issue in the elections of 2000 - 2004 - 2008 and now 2010
 
10 years of no solutions.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 07, 2010, 10:54:43 PM
10 years of R's and D's in charge.

We need a new manifesto . . . or an honest to God return to the one we got in the first place.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on September 08, 2010, 12:40:14 PM
Wow. I guess Obama really does suck. I guess we need to fire him right? Then what? Oh, yes, Joe Biden is President. Oh yea, fire him. Then what? Oh yes. Nancy Pelosi is President. Oh, yea, fire her. Then what? Daniel Inouye is President (I had to look that one up). Oh, yea, fire him because he is a Democrat. Then what? Oh, yes, HILLARY CLINTON is President! Oh, yea, fire her. Then What? Oh, yes, Timothy Geithner is President. Oh, yea, fire him. Then what? Oh, yes, Robert Gates is President. Leave him alone because he is a Republican.
 
That should keep us busy for a while  ::)
 
I swear nobody gets it. Everybody is out to 'get Obama' but their neighborhoods are crumbling around them because all they do is complain about 'the administration'. It happened during the Bush tenure but it is just out of control now. Our choice ws either Obama/Biden, or McCain/Palin. More people picked Obama/Biden. Get involved in grass roots efforts to elect candidates that support your values and stop complaining about things that in reality, you can't change.
 
Come up with solutions, people.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 08, 2010, 12:47:41 PM
(http://forum.eeticket.com/images/nodifference.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 08, 2010, 01:37:59 PM
For those if you that have seen this (http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.asp), move on to the next post. For those of you that have not... quite a letter to the Obama.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 11, 2010, 10:04:42 PM
http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/liberty/social-engineering-bill-in-senate-will-force-you-into-city/ (http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/liberty/social-engineering-bill-in-senate-will-force-you-into-city/)

Progressive Social Engineering at its most insidious.

States rights?

Please. I don't think they exist anymore . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 11, 2010, 10:09:56 PM
To coin a phrase - "thepartiesarethesystem" Pick a puppet, left or right. SB1619 is just another way to tighten the grip.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 11, 2010, 11:27:50 PM
this is the bill's summary: Livable Communities Act of 2009 - Establishes in the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) an Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities (OSHC). Establishes in the executive branch an independent Interagency Council on Sustainable Communities. Requires the OSHC Director to establish a program to make comprehensive planning grants and sustainability challenge grants to eligible entities (partnerships between a consortium of units of general local government and an eligible partner, which may be a metropolitan planning organization, a rural planning organization, a regional council, or a state). Requires the use of a comprehensive planning grant to carry out a project to: (1) coordinate land use, housing, transportation, and infrastructure planning processes across jurisdictions and agencies; (2) identify potential regional partnerships for developing and implementing a comprehensive regional plan; (3) conduct or update housing, infrastructure, transportation, energy, and environmental assessments to determine regional needs and promote sustainable development; (4) develop or update a comprehensive regional plan or goals and strategies to implement an existing comprehensive regional plan; and (5) implement local zoning and other code changes necessary to implement a comprehensive regional plan and promote sustainable development. Requires the use of a sustainability challenge grant to: (1) promote integrated transportation, housing, energy, and economic development activities carried out across policy and governmental jurisdictions; (2) promote sustainable and location-efficient development; and (3) implement projects identified in a comprehensive regional plan. Directs the OSHC Director to study and report to specified congressional committees on incentives for encouraging lenders to make, and homebuyers and homeowners to participate in, energy-efficient mortgages and location-efficient mortgages.   
 
here is the full text:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1619 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1619)
 
 
  if you can find anything about mass forced moves to cities i'll be very surprised.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 12, 2010, 12:45:38 AM
No - it's not spelled out in the bill itself (I read through it) but if you apply a little prognosticatory (I just coined that word and I LIKE it) thinking - you can see where it's going.

Benevolent tyranny is insidious.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on September 12, 2010, 11:18:13 PM
There was an article in I think Time Mag not long ago that made a case for urban living vs the burbs, but not forced residency, more a green type discussion. It spoke of energy use, infrastructure, how the burbs are gobbling up agricultural land.                                   Don't go Amish yet!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 13, 2010, 07:39:19 AM
Not Amish yet. Semi-Mennonite perhaps.

Here's an extension of previous foreign policy - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704621204575488361149625050.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704621204575488361149625050.html)

thepartiearethesystemthepartiesarethesystemthepartiesarethesystem


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on September 24, 2010, 07:45:14 AM
Wow! That's about all I can say to that.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 24, 2010, 10:57:42 AM
and speaking of the Obama Admin.... All of you "SANDBOX" VETS out there... word to the wise is sufficient.... if it applies..
 
  [size=5][size=7pt]Clock Ticking on Stop-Loss Pay[/][/][/size] September 16, 2010 Military.com[/][/b][/size][/color][/font]|[/]by Bryant Jordan[/] [/] [/][/]
[/][/]
Only 1 out of 3 eligible veterans have appliled for the special pay.  [/][/]
There's just over one month until the deadline arrives for those who were stop-lossed because of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to file for special pay that makes up for their extra time in uniform.[/]
While "tens of thousands" of eligible troops and vets have already been cleared to receive about $4,000 in back pay, the White House says most of the $534 million set aside for the pay is so far going unclaimed.[/]
[/]
In a move to get the word out, the Obama administration and the Department of Veterans Affairs issued joint statements Sept. 15 reminding those forced to stay in beyond their end-of-service or retirement dates to file for the cash -- $500 per month for each month they were stop-lossed. [/]
"The deadline is approaching fast," Obama said in a video (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/09/15/president-obamas-message-veterans-retroactive-pay-due-stop-loss) released on the White House and Defense Department websites, "and if you don't apply by October 21 you're going to miss out." [/]
Obama said there is a perception among many vets that the special stop-loss pay is "some sort of gimmick, or scam, or a way for the government to call you back to service. [/]
"Nothing could be further from the truth," Obama said. "This is no gimmick or trick. You worked hard. You earned this money."[/]
Instructions on how to file the claim (http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2010/0710_stoploss/) are available on the DoD website. [/]
Obama signed legislation authorizing the special pay last year. It extends to any servicemember who served between Sept. 11, 2001, and Sept. 30, 2009, and whose service was extended under stop-loss -- a provision that enabled the government to hold servicemembers deemed vital to the war effort beyond their contractual service or retirement dates. [/]
Several servicemembers have sued over stop-loss in the past six years, but the cases have been dismissed.[/]
Defense Department officials estimate that about 186,000 troops were extended by stop-loss[/]


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 24, 2010, 11:46:08 AM
Interesting....

Income Tax Cut, JFK Hopes To Spur Economy 1962/8/13 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEdXrfIMdiU#)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on September 24, 2010, 05:47:56 PM
Regarding the different presidents different corps video,

It looks like the video is comparing what looks like a more formal speech vs. a casual pep talk rally.  It's apples and oranges.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 24, 2010, 09:22:44 PM
Apples and oranges.... I think the message ... formal or not... is LESS TAX. Kenedy would.... in no way, recognize his party today.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on September 25, 2010, 01:16:02 PM
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs280.snc4/40331_1552320048660_1254904531_1574307_3606947_n.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on September 25, 2010, 03:15:51 PM
Reagan wouldn't recognize his party either.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on September 25, 2010, 03:28:00 PM
I will say in the years I have been following politics...Reagan would see a hell of a lot he would recognize than Kennedy...to begin with .... they were both conservatives... Reagan's plan and spending was don't to drop the Soviet Union...a country that cost us a heck of a lot of money over the years ...to it's breakup. Kennedy spent to also stave of.... guess who???? Bay of Pigs and finally In Vietnam. Both still had Conservative roots...
 
I was a Young Dem for Kennedy when he ran for POTUS...even had the straw hat...and I also backed Reagan when I became a dreaded GOP. 
 
Reagan wouldn't recognize his party either.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 05, 2010, 03:45:26 PM
We have a choice to make once and for all: between the empire and the spiritual and physical salvation of our people. No road for the people will ever be open unless the government completely gives up control over us or any aspect of our lives. It has led the country into an abyss and it does not know the way out.
— Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, as quoted by Pravda (1986)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 11, 2010, 02:03:56 PM
Has anybody see this little ditty (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703735804575536370151720874.html) in the Wall Street Journal yet? As I recall thre were lots of promises made to support small businesses. And what's up with Target? Jeez according to the press I've seen both parties hate that company. I think I'll shop there some more!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 17, 2010, 11:22:09 AM
(http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20101016/capt.26fd2b988d8749a494aa9d2cb41502c8-26fd2b988d8749a494aa9d2cb41502c8-0.jpg?x=400&y=251&q=85&sig=3Ftny6tUTRDBBLNSENHwSA--)
 
This was actually the lead photo on the Yahoo article of the Dem rally in Columbus Ohio.
 
Not all that flattering . . . seems the bloom is off the rose.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 17, 2010, 12:03:07 PM
It's an odd picture for sure. It has kind of a Jerry Lewis feel to it along some other element I can't quite put my finger on.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on October 18, 2010, 02:45:58 PM
Erkel.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on October 18, 2010, 05:04:23 PM
Good Heavens. EVERYBODY can take a bad photo. Are we so short-sighted that we base our vote on a photograph?!?!?!?!?!?!?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 18, 2010, 05:52:28 PM
Hey, it's all equal opportunity around here.

(http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/9/5/5/8/4/6/Nancy-Pelosi-18944964263.jpeg)

(http://www.shareordie.in/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/funny-bush-001.jpg)

(http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/2009/1208/gop-blasts-harry-reid-for-slavery-remark/article_photo1.jpg/7091197-1-eng-US/article_photo1.jpg_full_600.jpg)

(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LQIKJqLIqaE/0.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 18, 2010, 06:18:54 PM
Quote
Good Heavens. EVERYBODY can take a bad photo. Are we so short-sighted that we base our vote on a photograph?!?!?!?!?!?!?

I wouldn't be surprised if some folks did.
 
I just found it surprising that the media (who's had a love affair with this fellow) would publish such an unflattering photo when there were many more from the batch that didn't look so damn dorky.
 
I should base my vote on sock color preference.
 
I mean if it's an R or a D that's gonna win - sock color is about the only difference your gonna get in the end.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 18, 2010, 06:21:28 PM
Gee I dunno, the socks thing is pretty black and white is you ask me.

(http://lovemeow.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Socks_cat_1.JPG)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on October 18, 2010, 07:32:04 PM
Quote

I should base my vote on sock color preference.
 
I mean if it's an R or a D that's gonna win - sock color is about the only difference your gonna get in the end.


This is so funny. A few days ago I was thinking about a boy I dated a couple of times when I was in high school. I didn't like him because I thought his shoe-boots were square-toed and dorky. He was probably a nice guy... I don't think I remember much more about him than those shoes.

What dolts we can all be at times.

Take heed guys, it's not bad breath or your poor income... it's those danged dorky square-toed shoe-boots she doesn't like!

:(



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on October 18, 2010, 07:38:11 PM
(http://images0.lkimg.com/product-images--6353268912dc1cb790fc0cbfbe896d3ab27630b5-a9230333f45907aa--jpg_sqthumb_med--mensshoes-men-apos-s-chosto-square-toe-boot-by-clarks-black-leather.jpg)
 
(http://images1.lkimg.com/product-images--7fcc33b46693b3e8e60a0e74aa65b1f24466c9e8-a9230333f45907aa--jpg_sqthumb_med--mensshoes-men-apos-s-lyrics-square-toe-boot-by-lounge-by-mark-nason-tan.jpg)
 
(http://images2.lkimg.com/product-images--e552a3fbbee1b1dbd2c28137b53a214e77efa208-646cb4508b8f6ae1--jpg_sqthumb_med--mensshoes-dco-men-shoes-dcoshs803-10blk.jpg)
 
(http://images0.lkimg.com/product-images--1ab85e49a11c10b54021f3a89efb8677ec2663df-646cb4508b8f6ae1--jpg_sqthumb_med--mensshoes-dco-men-shoes-dcoshs902a-14rw.jpg)
 
(http://images3.lkimg.com/product-images--f05af1bf35752238914ae94cf66125b2035edf75-2e02ed71027f2fd1--jpg_sqthumb_med--mensshoes-zengara-men-apos-s-z30034-boots-black-leather.jpg)
(http://images3.lkimg.com/product-images--cb4b7975f3c2b6fb2709708fd61e1ef4b993e99d-a9230333f45907aa--jpg_sqthumb_med--mensshoes-men-apos-s-8666-square-toe-boot-by-zota-rusty-leather.jpg)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on October 18, 2010, 07:45:01 PM
ROFLOL @ NP & SOCKS!!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on October 19, 2010, 06:15:54 AM
Shoe-boots are still dorky.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on October 19, 2010, 12:49:51 PM
THis was a Bush problem too, not just an Obama problem.

Why U.S. can't find Osama bin Laden
By Peter Bergen, CNN National Security Analyst
STORY HIGHLIGHTS

U.S. spends billions on an enormous intelligence bureaucracy, says Peter Bergen
He says nearly a decade after 9/11, U.S. can't locate Osama bin Laden
American intelligence agencies aren't positioned to infiltrate militant groups, he says
Bergen: "Budgets should be cut if the CIA can't provide proof that it is penetrating al-Qaeda"
Editor's note: Peter Bergen, CNN's national security analyst, is a fellow at the New America Foundation, a Washington-based think tank that promotes innovative thought from across the ideological spectrum, and at New York University's Center on Law and Security. He's the author of "The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader."

(CNN) -- American taxpayers have forked over around half a trillion dollars to U.S. intelligence services since the 9/11 attacks, yet nearly a decade after al Qaeda assaults on New York and Washington, the American intelligence community still cannot answer the most basic of questions:

Where is Osama bin Laden? Where is his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri? And where is Taliban leader Mullah Omar?

As reported by CNN on Monday, NATO officials believe al Qaeda's leaders are hiding somewhere in northwestern Pakistan, while Mullah Omar is thought to orbit between Quetta in western Pakistan and the southern port city of Karachi. As Pakistan is roughly twice as large as California and Karachi is a city of 18 million, these are not particularly precise locations for the world's most wanted men.

If the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies were private companies and were chronically unable to accomplish one of their key missions, their shareholders would have long ago revolted, fired their management and their stock would be trading at values near zero. Instead, the budgets for the U.S. intelligence agencies continue to spiral upward, while almost a million Americans possess top-secret clearances.

What does a top-secret clearance gain you?

Not much, judging by the content of the tens of thousands of secret documents about the Afghan War made public by WikiLeaks in July. The one surprising thing about this massive classified data dump was how little of it was in any way surprising. It contained the kind of material that the casual reader of news articles have long known: Elements of Pakistan's military intelligence service may be supporting the Taliban!

The dirty little secret of the intelligence world is that much of what you really need to know isn't exactly a secret anyway. Bin Laden declared war on the United States on CNN in 1997 and then again on ABC News a year later, and he soon made good on those threats with al Qaeda's attacks on two U.S. embassies in Africa and the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen.

In the summer of 2001, bin Laden and his top commanders gave an interview to the Middle East Broadcasting Corp., in which they dropped broad hints that they were planning a large-scale, anti-American assault, which turned out to be the 9/11 attacks. When President George W. Bush was briefed by the CIA a month before 9/11 that bin Laden intended to attack the United States, it was merely to state the blindingly obvious.

Similarly today, al Qaeda and allied groups such as the Taliban constantly release videotapes and print products in which they lay out their doctrines and strategies and document their attacks and tactics, all of which are widely available on the Internet.

The conflict with al Qaeda and its allies is effectively the first open-source war, which is the opposite of how the highly secretive Kremlin conducted the Cold War. Yet U.S. intelligence agencies remain largely configured as if they are doing battle with a superpower, rather than a network of jihadist networks.

As a result, the CIA today more resembles an accounting firm than the swashbuckling, action-oriented spy agency of popular imagination.

This is not an accident. Hiring by the CIA and other agencies in the intelligence community is predicated on passing a background check that has become more onerous since 9/11 and is a legacy of the Cold War notion that a superpower adversary with billions of dollars at its disposal is trying to recruit spies and informants.

But al Qaeda has no capacity to buy spies inside America's intelligence community, and, more broadly, al Qaeda and its allies have shown no ability to recruit inside the U.S. government.

Yet applicants to the American intelligence agencies today are likely to encounter real problems with their background checks if they have relatives in the Arab world or have spent time in countries such as Pakistan, precisely the sort of life experiences necessary for effective spies.

By contrast, the Office of Strategic Services, the precursor of the CIA, recruited bilingual agents deeply familiar with European culture who took great risks to undertake highly effective operations in Nazi-occupied Europe. In today's CIA, those brave men and women wouldn't have made it past the background check.

Much of the work that has been done to reform the intelligence community since 9/11 has been directed at fussing with the wiring diagram of its bureaucracy: Should the director of National Intelligence control CIA station chiefs, or is that the purview of the CIA director? This kind of jockeying, of course, does nothing to solve the real question American taxpayers want answered: Where is bin Laden? That question is likely only to be resolved by good old-fashioned espionage.

Emblematic of what ails the intelligence community today was its reaction to the failed attempt by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) to blow up a Northwest passenger jet landing in Detroit, Michigan, with a bomb made of plastic explosives on Christmas Day 2009. To do the job, AQAP recruited in Yemen a Nigerian graduate of the elite University College London. His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

There was a great deal of subsequent hand-wringing by Obama administration officials about how improved information sharing protocols might have worked better to assemble the shards of information known to the government about Abdulmutallab, which might have prevented him from boarding the Northwest flight.

Their solution: Hire more analysts. But this was to misdiagnose the problem. The intelligence community is awash in analysts. While the precise number is classified, it is reasonable to assume that there are tens of thousands. What is needed is not more analysts but better on-the-ground intelligence.

If the CIA had had a spy on the fringes of AQAP, the appearance of an educated Nigerian from London in the remote desert areas of Yemen where al Qaeda members hide out would have been something that the spy would have flagged to his handlers as remarkable. There does not appear to have been such an agent.

What can be done? The House and Senate Intelligence committees that oversee the intelligence community should hold the CIA to real account using a simple metric: How many jihadist groups including al Qaeda have been penetrated by its agents?

This is less onerous a demand then one might imagine. After just a few months of hanging out in Pakistan, Bryant Neal Vinas, an unemployed Hispanic-American convert to militant Islam from Long Island, managed to waltz into an al Qaeda training camp where he was trained how to attack American bases in Afghanistan. And that was seven years after 9/11.

Budgets should be cut if the CIA can't provide proof that it is penetrating al Qaeda and its affiliates; at the end of the day, this is the most likely way that we will ever find bin Laden, who is not going to be voluntarily given up by the few who know his location today.

President Obama should appoint someone in the U.S. government whose job it is to find bin Laden and who can coordinate that effort across the 16 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community.

Finally, the background check for spies should be reformed so that men and women with the regional expertise and linguistic abilities to penetrate and recruit inside jihadist terrorist groups are hired to go outside the wire and get the job done.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Peter Bergen.
 

 
 
 
 

 
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/10/19/bergen.finding.bin.laden/index.html?hpt=C1 (http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/10/19/bergen.finding.bin.laden/index.html?hpt=C1) 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 19, 2010, 01:09:31 PM
Top secret isn't that high of a clearance. There's something like 17 levels above what the president gets. What that gets you I don't know. To coin a phrase, it's way above my pay grade.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on October 19, 2010, 01:37:33 PM
As someone I know who is a USMC Colonel says, "my security clearance is so high you have to have a high clearance to know it!" 

Ridiculous.  Military bureaucracy at its best.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on October 19, 2010, 03:07:29 PM
I went to Reyer's recently looking for a nice pair of dress pumps, and had to insist on "no square toes" with the saleswoman. At one point she brought out some "Witchiepoo" patent leather square toed gags with a big gold buckle. I very nicely explained that just wasn't "my style". LOL

Speaking of "Witchiepoo", here's her website. Billie Hayes is a big animal advocate, founder of "Pet Hope".

http://www.billiehayes.com/pethope.html (http://www.billiehayes.com/pethope.html)



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 19, 2010, 03:42:44 PM
Security Clearances mean nothing outside the facility or circle you work in. There is what they call "NEED TO KNOW" that assures matching security levels don't allow access to material and information outside your specific circle. Security of documents have a dilution time as well...so much time before it is taken down to the next level. What makes things "super secure" is the LEVEL of the classification.... I had a "Top Secret Crypto" with the ability to handle "FLASH". "Matters of National Security" are usually not subject to timeperiods. At the time..I got stuff before the POTUS. We even had "secret" words like.... DEFCON with 5 levels of that. I remember being instructed to never mention that word outside a secure facility or face a "10-10" ( 10 years in FED Jail and $10,000 fine) I almost choked when I saw "DEFCON-4" the movie in the 80's.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEFCON (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEFCON)
 
What has always been the perfect rule was... once more than ONE person knows.... it is no longer a secret.  ;)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 20, 2010, 01:17:45 PM
The Roots of the Housing Crisis (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-scheer/obama-hires-a-hustler_b_769266.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=102010&utm_medium=email&utm_content=BlogEntry&utm_term=Daily+Brief)
 
 
Quote
Were President Barack Obama to ask that question about the origins of this crisis of Tom Donilon, one of his closest aides whom he recently appointed to the critical job of national security adviser, Donilon would find it even more awkward to invoke the defense of ignorance. As the chief lobbyist for Fannie Mae from 1999 to 2005, he was far more intimately involved than Paulson in the manufacturing of this crisis. He successfully pressured Congress to give Fannie Mae the green light to speed past any sound regulation. Indeed, had Congress endorsed the barest semblance of regulation of the Fannie Mae-led housing scam, it would have been stillborn instead of being a very much alive Frankenstein creation.
 
Fannie Mae paid Donilon, a longtime Democratic Party operative, $15 million to lobby Congress to gut the power of government regulators to check the scandalous behavior in what would have been judged a crime until a majority of pro-Wall Street Republicans and Democrats in Congress rewrote the laws. He was also a top executive at Fannie Mae during the period when cooking the books to increase executive compensation would later lead to a $400 million fine. In pursuit of those profits, Fannie Mae entered into a partnership with Angelo Mozilo's shady Countrywide Financial, and together they produced the computerized CLUES and MERS credit verification and mortgage registration systems that are at the heart of the housing swindle. Mozilo at least was finally slapped with a huge fine last week, while Donilon has yet to return a penny.

 
I think the Republicans and Democrats ultimately represent the same interests, who put up a front of two faces to offer the illusion of choice. To NOT vote for a third party is a wasted vote.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on October 20, 2010, 10:52:01 PM
whats the 3rd party candidates plan to balance the budget?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 21, 2010, 07:47:35 AM
Most of the third party candidates don't have that many favors out and most importanly they are not engrained in "the system" of the two parties.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 21, 2010, 08:06:48 AM
Exactly. Look at campaign contributions. Most 'establishment' candidates get their money from the same sources. Those sources essentially hedging their bets and driving the agenda. Take someone who is not beholden to the system and they will work to change the system.

If you LIKE the system, keep voting for R's and D's. They are the political arm of the oligarchy.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 21, 2010, 09:02:41 AM
Ok...so to Lifefeedsonlife and others not wanting Rs or Ds... Here is the list of ALL parties in the USA.... Take your pick and good luck with the one you choose. Look.... R and D are the main tools... How you use them is up to you. First rule I think should KNOW YOUR CANDIDATE and decide if you can work with them. Straight ticket vots are for BRAIN DEAD AHOLES...and most of them shouldn't be allowed to vote...but in my travels...that is only MY opinion.
 
So this is quite a list and I am sure there are others..... CHOOSE Wisely
 
If the only tools I have are a hammer and a saw.... I have to deal with it. Both can do the job well but it is best used by those who KNOW how to use them. I have a frind whose worst enemy is a hammer... he puts holes in things that do not need holes and he saws and cuts short.... He needs to actually learn to use them.
 
So...when I hear that we need more choice than what we have....I cringe. What we need to do is be proactive and not show up for a political election with the other 364 days watching sports and attending basket weaving classes. Don't show up on Race Day and expect to place or show and especially win. All things need homework and too many of us DO NOT DO THAT.
 
I am Registered GOP but I vote and donate across parties.... I gravitate to those who best reflect my thoughts and beliefs. All I can say is this..... Please... for your safety and peace of mind.... if Emperor comes to our Political Choice.... DO NOT...repeat...DO NOT pick me. You will NOT like what I do, day one. ;)
 
 
 
 
Democratic Party
Republican Party
Constitution Party
Green Party of the US
Libertarian Pary
American First Party
American Party
American Independent Party
America's Independent Party
American Nazi Party
American Reform Party
Boston Tea Party
Communist Party USA
Freedom Socialist Party/Radical Women
The Greens/Green Party USA (G/GPUSA)
Independence Party
Independent American Party
Labor Party
Light Party
Modern Whig Party
National Socialist Movement
Objectivist Party
Party For Socialism And Liberation
Peace And Freedom Party
Prohibition Party
Reform Party
Social Democrats, USA (Socialist Party USA)
Socialist Party USA
Socialist Action
Socialist Equality Party
Socialist Labor Party
Socialist Workers Party
U.S. Marijuana Party
U.S. Pacifist Party
Veterans Party Of America
Workers World Party
Working Families Party
American Patriot Party
Conservative Party USA
Democratic Socialists Of America
Libertarian National Socialist Green Party
Pansexual Peace Party
Progressive Labor Party
Revolutionary Communist Party
The Third Party
Workers Party USA
World Socialist Party Of The USA
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 21, 2010, 12:02:46 PM
Quote
So...when I hear that we need more choice than what we have....I cringe. What we need to do is be proactive and not show up for a political election with the other 364 days watching sports and attending basket weaving classes. Don't show up on Race Day and expect to place or show and especially win. All things need homework and too many of us DO NOT DO THAT.

Well said - and I woul dargue that one should not just educate themselves on the R's and D's - but educate themselves on the "alternatives" out there too. That - and the ISSUES at hand . . . not just immediate issues, but the context from which they have arisen.

Hey - where's the Rent's Too Damn High Party?!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on October 21, 2010, 12:41:07 PM
maybe we need to go back to picketing the Capital and forcing our Congressmen to behave in an honest manner.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 21, 2010, 03:21:52 PM
WHy did I just know you would say that.... It appears our MR Rent's Too High....doesn't  :o  even pay rent.
 

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Rent-Is-Too-Damn-High-Candidate-Doesnt-Pay-Rent-105346278.html (http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local-beat/Rent-Is-Too-Damn-High-Candidate-Doesnt-Pay-Rent-105346278.html)
 
 
Quote
So...when I hear that we need more choice than what we have....I cringe. What we need to do is be proactive and not show up for a political election with the other 364 days watching sports and attending basket weaving classes. Don't show up on Race Day and expect to place or show and especially win. All things need homework and too many of us DO NOT DO THAT.


Well said - and I woul dargue that one should not just educate themselves on the R's and D's - but educate themselves on the "alternatives" out there too. That - and the ISSUES at hand . . . not just immediate issues, but the context from which they have arisen.

Hey - where's the Rent's Too Damn High Party?!


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 21, 2010, 04:03:13 PM
I think a thorough audit of Fannie and Freddie is in order. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/oct/21/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-losses-363bn)
 
And the folks that have run it for the past decade or so should be looking at indictments. Let's see if the DOJ has any balls. At least Janet Reno had balls . . .
 
(figuratively - well maybe literally - but I don't wanna paint any pictures for - DOH!)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 21, 2010, 06:36:53 PM
And maybe a revisit of Chris Dodd and Barney as well. Country Wide is still a hanger on Uranus... oops.... sorry Barney  ::)
 
 
I think a thorough audit of Fannie and Freddie is in order. ([url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/oct/21/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-losses-363bn[/url])
 
And the folks that have run it for the past decade or so should be looking at indictments. Let's see if the DOJ has any balls. At least Janet Reno had balls . . .
 
(figuratively - well maybe literally - but I don't wanna paint any pictures for - DOH!)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 22, 2010, 07:53:08 AM
I don't know the actual makeup of these entities but it is said that they are asking for over $300 BBBB Billion more to shore themselves up. Does anyone notice a smell in the room???
 
I love this crap...we give these pigs Billions and we notice 2 things.... those at the top never lose a beat and continue to skim and.... billions of these dollars are unaccountable. No one seems to know where they went and when we really look.... we have some well fed pigs instead of a well fed plethora of various livestock.   Hmmmmm
 
 
...who really are Fannie...and Freddie... ??? ...who really owns them... :confused: ...Hmmmmm... :what: ...do they have a few cousins...out there... :huh: ...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 22, 2010, 09:40:51 AM
From the Chinese to the pigs but eventually... billed to you and I
 
TY and keep printing the dollars LOL
 
 
...the monies are coming from Whom...to Whom...Hmmmmmmm...............
 
 
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae[/url] ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae[/url])


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 25, 2010, 08:19:48 AM
I wonder how this is going to play out????
 
below is part of a WIKILEAK just the other day...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html)
 
Below id a DOD release over 4 years ago....
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918 (http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918)
 
 
Sound somewhat alike???? What is the secret if the DOD  put it out in 2006???
 
Question.... Were there WMDs or weren't there and WHO is the expert to decide????


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 25, 2010, 09:53:13 AM
I have read this many times. The Judges are not OUR choices but the rest are sans the VPOTUS.... he or she comes as part of the package. I know I put up a list of recognized political parties in these United States so there are choices, but...who and what are the candidates.... and as many elections as I have been involved in....at the end of the day...... I have seen names like Mickey Mouse, Goofy, Homer Simpson...well you get my drift.... WTF????? Is this the best these...alleged qualified VOTERS can do??? It isn't funny.... you couldn't find one on the ballot you wanted? You couldn't write in the name of an actual player that you liked? Or do you not do that because you can't even spell the name of the REAL person you want? If you cannot pick a candidate in a legitamite manner you just pick one out of thin air as you stand in the booth..... I pity you. Your life must be a joke, as are anyone under the age of say 70...who pulls a straight ticket. You show me that you can't even think.
 
So Nov 2 is a week from now and we still have undecideds???? What,...are you waiting for a bribe???? I would like to think the UNDECIDEDS are those who feel it is none of the askers damned business..... but I fear it ain't so. Nov 3 will come and AGAIN.... Mickey Mouse and Homer are on the list.... I wish they would not waste the ink and time to do this crap and leave the space blank if you have to either think of something not so clever or toss a coin. People died for this right....people in other countries still do die to do this and you mock them and others. I got an Email from a friend visiting the Philippines. He is staying with a friend and it is election time there as well. Funny thing.... the Hotels, voting places and government buildings have military guards with auto weapons....not to keep you out per say but to protect you frrom injury or death...but you know what..... they still vote. They do that even if it can be deadly unsafe..... and we won't, don't or make a mockery out of one of the last and maybe most important rights we have anymore. ( though 2nd amend. can assure it )
 
Well Nov 3 will give us the next step and Jan 20 will begin the next phase. Good luck to us...I think we are going to need it. 
 
 
...Good Read...
 
[url]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18568.htm[/url] ([url]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18568.htm[/url])
 
[url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/reese.asp[/url] ([url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/reese.asp[/url])


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 25, 2010, 10:09:51 AM
Naw.... but the premise is the same.... YA GETS WHATCHA VOTE FOR. Only two factions in this equation...those who vote and those they vote for.
 
 
...WOW...you got all of that...from this... ;D ... ;) ...
 
 
[url]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18568.htm[/url] ([url]http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18568.htm[/url])
 
[url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/reese.asp[/url] ([url]http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/reese.asp[/url])


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 25, 2010, 01:05:49 PM
Well... another hit... Large Companies are clamouring about dropping employees healthcare from their system.... Ouch.... Hmmmm I hear some scurrying in my walls.... I think the ship is taking on more water...
 
I also hear a faint but steady voice.... it saaaaayyyys
 
"Government Health care for all........"
 
"Paint that skunk."
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 26, 2010, 07:56:30 AM
LOL Great...encourage the Bam Bam lovers to smoke, pay more taxes and get sick to use the Health Care...
 
What ever happened to simple messages like LSMFT LOL


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 29, 2010, 10:17:36 AM
PUNKIN'HEAD!!!..   :rofl:
 
 
([url]http://www.redstate.com/jrichardson/files/2010/10/georgewbushpumpkin.jpg[/url])


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 29, 2010, 11:53:39 AM
And I voted for him..... twice... but the one below, really scares me  :o  scares me...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: ...that did not take long...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 29, 2010, 01:19:24 PM
I was thinkin' a bit . . . in that most of the Liberals that rise to the greatest positions of power tend to view people on the whole as stupid. Most Conservatives that rise to the greatest positions of power tend to view people on the whole as immoral.

Fact is - I'm neither . . . and I'm both.

Either way . . .

The more I consider the history of the Money Parties and their faux polarization (because when you look at what I'd positied above - they're not 'opposites' at all) the more convinced i am that a vote for an R or a D is truly the wasted vote.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 29, 2010, 01:31:28 PM
So your answer is??
 
 
I was thinkin' a bit . . . in that most of the Liberals that rise to the greatest positions of power tend to view people on the whole as stupid. Most Conservatives that rise to the greatest positions of power tend to view people on the whole as immoral.

Fact is - I'm neither . . . and I'm both.

Either way . . .

The more I consider the history of the Money Parties and their faux polarization (because when you look at what I'd positied above - they're not 'opposites' at all) the more convinced i am that a vote for an R or a D is truly the wasted vote.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 29, 2010, 03:34:29 PM
You had a nice list fo parties to choose from - many of which I don't see eye to eye with.

I'm pretty Libertarian 'bout stuff. I like the underpinning philosphy. Jibes most closely with the Consitution in my interpretation. They just need more candidates to field and more money for marketing. Thing is - nobody with any substantial wants to give money to a Libertarian candidate as they aren't likely to be swayed by it.

My answer is vote Libertarian!

(This message was approved by lifefeedsonlife.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 29, 2010, 05:01:21 PM
We need your list of Libertarian candidates and guidance as to what to do if none are offered in a local race???  ;)
 
 
You had a nice list fo parties to choose from - many of which I don't see eye to eye with.

I'm pretty Libertarian 'bout stuff. I like the underpinning philosphy. Jibes most closely with the Consitution in my interpretation. They just need more candidates to field and more money for marketing. Thing is - nobody with any substantial wants to give money to a Libertarian candidate as they aren't likely to be swayed by it.

My answer is vote Libertarian!

(This message was approved by lifefeedsonlife.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 29, 2010, 06:10:52 PM
When the Money Parties own the ball and the field, it's difficult for anyone else to play the game.
here are the Libertarian Candidates on ballot in PA:

Douglas M. Jamison U.S. Senator (pushed off ballot - write-in)
Marakay Rogers Governor (pushed off ballot - write-in)
Kat Valleley Lt. Governor (pushed off ballot - write-in)

As far as District 3 goes - I'll write in someone else.


I do like Brad Roae though. A rather decent fellow.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 29, 2010, 07:27:34 PM
Why do I get the feeling this is Pat Paulson for POTUS all over again..... Just not too sure....
 
 
 
http://www.lp.org/2010-candidate-list (http://www.lp.org/2010-candidate-list)
 
 
 
When the Money Parties own the ball and the field, it's difficult for anyone else to play the game.
here are the Libertarian Candidates on ballot in PA:

Douglas M. Jamison U.S. Senator (pushed off ballot - write-in)
Marakay Rogers Governor (pushed off ballot - write-in)
Kat Valleley Lt. Governor (pushed off ballot - write-in)

As far as District 3 goes - I'll write in someone else.


I do like Brad Roae though. A rather decent fellow.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 30, 2010, 09:30:58 PM
So - at the Meadville Halloween Parade, when the Republican Mike Kelly entourage walked by there was a lot of clapping and huzzahs and such . . . when the Dahlkemper Democrat group went by, I swear I heard crickets. Seems Sherman Allen is well liked by folks though. Or maybe they were diggin' his offroad Segway. ( I liked Roger Williams as a Commissioner back in his day. )


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on October 30, 2010, 10:05:33 PM
This is a rhetorical political question... why do people of lesser financial means persist in supporting the upper economic classes politically?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 30, 2010, 10:10:52 PM
That doesn't have a rhetorical answer though.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on October 30, 2010, 10:39:01 PM
This is a rhetorical political question... why do people of lesser financial means persist in supporting the upper economic classes politically?


Probably because most of the people running for office are wealthier than us common folk. I personally can think of only two people I know of that are wealthier than most of  the people they back for office.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 30, 2010, 10:43:40 PM
Georgr Soros comes to mind. He's the real life Blofeld.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on October 30, 2010, 10:48:06 PM
No, it doesn't, life but it just seems to me like the people with less money persist in supporting the ideologies of the weathy -- "them that has gets" and is supported by those without.  Know what I mean, Jelly Bean??


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on October 30, 2010, 11:00:21 PM
Yes'm I do. NP nailed it. Seems one needs the appropriate finances or financial backing in order to get anywhere 'far' in politics. Money is master in the system the Money Parties have created.

Philosophies are served far less than financial interests . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on October 31, 2010, 10:25:46 AM
I am not one of those who "HAS" but.... I have never been hired by ANYONE in my lifetime who made LESS money than than I did. Money doesn't make you terrible.... it is the gray matter that does that. How many people really think Gates and his wife are REALLY terrible????? SOme small towns and colleges appreciate past residents and alumni who do make it big and brings monetary HELP to the entities.
 
I don't like Collin Powell but.... before the State of PA shut down Scotland School for Veterans Children, he had a cullinary school building built for the students to larn aspects of the food industry... management to cook.... Now that is but a few years old and is being torn down. He had money and thought of a good place to spend it..... to maybe better lives of those who had less. Point is.... all rich people are not bad and all poor people are not good. Deeds tell a lot about a person.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on October 31, 2010, 07:49:49 PM
This is a rhetorical political question... why do people of lesser financial means persist in supporting the upper economic classes politically?
I've always wondered the same thing. 
People who ain't got a pot to piss in voting for millionaire Republicans who could care less about them.  Very strange.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 01, 2010, 01:05:34 AM
So fill me in on these poor folk running for office?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 01, 2010, 08:07:00 AM
Again..... my Mantra has been and continues to be..... if the problems in society..at all levels....get over whelming... hunt the first suspect, in your mirror. Politics runs on messages ...right or wrong..but a hell of a lot of money. The bottom line on ANY issue are, "Do we have the money to support the person or the projects but......just how much money CAN we spend as opposed to JUST SPEND IT." We have made political entities an industry. You CANNOT run for a damned thing out side your local community without your own money or people willing to throw theirs at you. We want SHOWS.... RALLIES, EVENTS, international personalities or just national personalities.... Movie Stars, Musicians and "RICH" people who have something to say. We have turned the Political Machine inot a HUNGRY, GREEDY UNSATIABLE EVENT. We require the full use of all the Media... We did this. We look at the High Gloss pamplets in the mail and wonder how much THAT cost to print..... just before we File 13 the damned thing. We even WANT, Lawyers, Doctors, CEOs and yes...even Movie Stars to run. I think the last POTUS without a college degree was Harry S. Oh and did I tell you, he worked in men's Habidashery??? WE created the boundries we expect them to touch... Now a POTUS prospect has to raise multi millions and probably BILLIONS to be put on the block.
 
So.... now we argue about rich people???? It is WE who did this so...as they say.... Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way, unless you can offer up real answers and not cry at the entity you created , Dr. Victor/Victoria Frankenstein. This is OUR monster but Bietching doesn't control it. Oh, and I don't believe in Santa, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy or Superman so don't offer up crap. In this Political Sewage... there is and will be only a few "boats" to even have any sort of input. You can vote on ANYONE of the other PARTY offerings but.... you will be back at the next election doing and saying the same thing. All I can say is EXCERSIZE your Write in ability... sans Mickey Mouse or Goofy. And, when you do, maybe you ought to write a check to this person, because of all I said in the beginning of this rant. If you don't.... then who are you trying to fool??? Skin in the Game. You don't need to send much.... cost of a pack of Cigarettes, a can of beer or a lottery ticket. To talk about the OFF THE GRID offerings is cheap.... putcher money where your mouth is.
 
Better yet, suit up and "man" up and make a run, yourself.  ;)
 
 
thoughts from a Curmudgeon
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 01, 2010, 08:22:11 AM
Many poor people tend to be/vote for Republicans, whose policies clearly favor the wealthy, imho. Why this is, I do not know. I prefer to support someone whose policies favor those of us with lesser means....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 01, 2010, 08:32:15 AM
Oh just as an after thought.... What kind of country are we that makes sure CONVICTS in PRISON get their Absentee Ballots but we can't "guarantee" those same ballots to our military? ???
 
Here is my thought on this whole thing....
 
NO ONE VOTES until the MILITARY does.... They are "paying the bill". And their votes should be counted FIRST and not as an afterthought. IF amounts left to be chcked won't change the results...then maybe it should be ours and especially if cast by a CONVICT or Felon, or non citizen.... and yes folks... NON CITIZENS will be allowed to vote in certain elections in Maine
 
http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/us-states-weigh-letting-non-citizens-vote (http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/us-states-weigh-letting-non-citizens-vote)
 
Local is only a foot in the door.
 
 
 
 
NO EARLY VOTING...
 
I am sure I can come up with a few more. My point is, that we are prostituting a right and duty that we have bled and died for. Is this what we want?
 
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 01, 2010, 08:34:19 AM
I really hate to tell you but "poor" tend to vote for "the hand that feeds them". Now, you go back and figure out what I just said....  ;)
 
 
Many poor people tend to be/vote for Republicans, whose policies clearly favor the wealthy, imho. Why this is, I do not know. I prefer to support someone whose policies favor those of us with lesser means....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 01, 2010, 10:54:15 AM
I'm sure some, if not all of you have seen this, but here's a refreshed to see who the wealthiest are. The summary is that the bottom line of wealth distribution is pretty evenly spread out across the money parties. It goes without saying they have a lot more nickels to rub together than I do.

1. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)$188.37 million
2. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)$160.05 million
3. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.)$152.62 million
4. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)$81.50 million
5. Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas)$73.75 million
6. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)$70.19 million
7. Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.)$56.49 million
8. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.)$55.47 million
9. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.)$49.70 million
10. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)$46.07 million
11. Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.)$31.41 million
12. Rep. Harry Teague (D-N.M.)$25.52 million
13. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)$21.74 million
14. Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.)$19.90 million
15. Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)$19.69 million
16. Rep. Gary Miller (R-Calif.)$19.37 million
17. Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-Texas)$18.41 million
18. Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)$18.28 million
19. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)$15.73 million
20. Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.)$14.90 million
21. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)$12.54 million
22. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)$12.12 million
23. Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.)$10.90 million
24. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)$10.52 million
25. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)$10.45 million
26. Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.)$9.73 million
27. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.)$9.30 million
28. Rep. Tom Petri (R-Wis.)$9.11 million
29. Rep. Chris Lee (R-N.Y.)$8.74 million
30. Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.)$8.51 million
31. Sen. Ted Kaufman (D-Del.)$8.48 million
32. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.)$8.34 million
33. Rep. Parker Griffith (R-Ala.)$8.29 million
34. Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)$8.03 million
35. Rep. John Spratt (D-S.C.)$7.94 million
36. Rep. John Linder (R-Ga.)$7.90 million
37. Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.)$7.71 million
38. Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.)$7.33 million
39. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)$7.10 million
40. Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.)$6.90 million
41. Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.)$6.83 million
42. Rep. Steve Kagen (D-Wis.)$6.77 million
43. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)$6.74 million
44. Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.)$6.67 million
45. Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas)$6.66 million
46. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)$6.31 million
47. Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)$6.22 million
48. Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.)$6.07 million
49. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.)$5.66 million
50. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)$5.34 million
51. Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.)$5.06 million


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 01, 2010, 11:19:25 AM
Ok, maybe poor was a "poor" choice of words


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 01, 2010, 11:27:26 AM
I don't see where the policies of either party ultimately serve those of us with lesser means. Sure the republicans seem to favor businesses in general, but that's what creates jobs. The democrats favor heavier taxation, redistribution and government programs, but that seems to be an "enabler" of sorts in the end. This of course is but a speck of the whole picture. In the end though the money parties get what they are after, more money, power and control.

My back and shoulders get more sore by the year.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 01, 2010, 11:36:24 AM
I don't see the Money Parties serving any interests bu ttheir own in the long run.

I think there's a solution - but folks tend to be frightened of chnage. Even if change provides relief from the BS that governance has become.

Context is everything.

I'm reading a LOT of history and piecing together how we got to where we are right now - and I can tell you that I am absolutely convinced that while R's and D's present themselves as opposed to each other to the public, they ultimately are not.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 01, 2010, 11:38:02 AM
I'm reading a LOT of history and piecing together how we got to where we are right now - and I can tell you that I am absolutely convinced that while R's and D's present themselves as opposed to each other to the public, they ultimately are not.

Ultimately they can't. We are after all their meal ticket.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 01, 2010, 11:42:14 AM
Look at the stats for CC:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42039.html (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42039.html)
We are white and poor, compared to the state and probably the rest of the country. Lots of double wides in CC, small houses, underemployment, etc.
But we are predominantly Republican. Why? What has the party done for us in the past decades? Are we poor but moral? Do we get a sense of moral superiority by voting Republican? Are we letting ourselves be distracted by the "moral issues" to the neglect of the economic one?
 
I agree Life and NP.. how do we force change? Another question... I honestly think we should start protesting in DC. The Colbert/Stewart rally was a start.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 01, 2010, 11:51:54 AM
Yup. They've written the rules to favor the two party system together, they've shared a dual monopoly of power for how long now? They receive donations from many of the same corporations and 'stakeholders.'

They are the Money Parties. They are the party of the Oligarchs for the Oligarchs.

A vote for R's and D's is the wasted vote. WRITE someone else in if you have to.
 
As for the Colbert / Stewart rally . . . I find it ironic that it was called a Resotration of Sanity yet one of the performers was Yusuf Islam (formerly Cat Stevens) performing his Cat song 'Peace Train.' Yusuf once very vocally greed to the Fatwah calling for the death of Salman Rushdie for writing a book that Muslims found offensive. Something I consider neither sane nor peaceful.
 
I saw a brief intervierw with a guy at that rally with a "Good Rush / Bad Rush" T-shirt on. Good Rush being the band, bad Rush being Limbaugh. The interviewer asked tthe guy if he knew that many of Rush's songs were based on the writing if Ayn Rand.
 
LOL!
 
Anyway - there were likely just as many mis-informed folks at the Beck rally back in August. Large groups of people are easy to mis-inform - individuals . . . not so much.
 
Rallies ain't the answer. Small groups organizing larger wholes are a good place to start. The Tea Parties began as a good idea, but got co-opted by the GOP. There are sane alternative parties out there that represent views that most folks would find more than reasonable - but their message isn't heard . . .
 
Why?
 
Because they are about philosophy of governance and not financial interest of governance. Therefore - they aren't on the reciving end of a lot of financial interestst finances. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 01, 2010, 12:28:08 PM
I go back to "the hand that feeds you".... if one party engages in handouts to voters.... you follow the premise of it all. Low Income describes 2 groups, beyond the aged and the disabled.... One works and has self esteem but under/self employed expecting at most a hand up....the other, no esteem, willing to accept handouts and expect them. My Uncle was a Dirt Farmer with little money from the peddling us kids did but.... he was proud and the kids ate andwere clean. He expectednothing but what he worked for but you know.... he got SURPLUS.... all he was elegible. Ironic.... Table was supplied from his farm and yet he was eligible for SURPLUS. Back then, there wasn't LIHEAP and RENT REBATES. We now have an industry of entitlements and the wages of the people who administer them... So.... keep a part of the population in constant "need" and those who GIVE the hand outs are almost insured perpetuation.
 
We wait for the card to be refilled, the heating bill to be credited and the rent to be subsidized.... oh and already having Health Care, Education and infrastruture thrown in and no outgoing responsibility for any of it but to be there and get it. There is a difference between "Poor" and "Pathetic" and race has NOTHING to do with it, just the level of pride and sense. I live in a precinct that is full of Section 8 and Public Housing. Income of any size comes from the few who are full employed, underemployed or those retired. We are full of multi Children Households with NO Male in the household or if there is...that tends to change at times. I worked the Poll for our precinct and in that demography..... being a GOP is so minimal, I have a hard time getting the 10 signatures to be put on the ballot as GOP is rare. I get a list of all the registered voters in the precinct and believe me.... 99% is DEM. You can find a study for anything...I just know what I see here and have the paperwork that reflects it. So here..... the "POOR" vote DEM...if they vote at all.
 
 
IMHO
 
 
Look at the stats for CC:
[url]http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42039.html[/url] ([url]http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42039.html[/url])
We are white and poor, compared to the state and probably the rest of the country. Lots of double wides in CC, small houses, underemployment, etc.
But we are predominantly Republican. Why? What has the party done for us in the past decades? Are we poor but moral? Do we get a sense of moral superiority by voting Republican? Are we letting ourselves be distracted by the "moral issues" to the neglect of the economic one?
 
I agree Life and NP.. how do we force change? Another question... I honestly think we should start protesting in DC. The Colbert/Stewart rally was a start.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on November 01, 2010, 02:29:36 PM
I'm sure some, if not all of you have seen this, but here's a refreshed to see who the wealthiest are. The summary is that the bottom line of wealth distribution is pretty evenly spread out across the money parties. It goes without saying they have a lot more nickels to rub together than I do.

1. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)$188.37 million
2. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)$160.05 million
3. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.)$152.62 million
4. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)$81.50 million
5. Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas)$73.75 million
6. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)$70.19 million
7. Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.)$56.49 million
8. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.)$55.47 million
9. Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.)$49.70 million
10. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)$46.07 million
11. Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.)$31.41 million
12. Rep. Harry Teague (D-N.M.)$25.52 million
13. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)$21.74 million
14. Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.)$19.90 million
15. Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho)$19.69 million
16. Rep. Gary Miller (R-Calif.)$19.37 million
17. Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-Texas)$18.41 million
18. Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)$18.28 million
19. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)$15.73 million
20. Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.)$14.90 million
21. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine)$12.54 million
22. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)$12.12 million
23. Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.)$10.90 million
24. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)$10.52 million
25. Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)$10.45 million
26. Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.)$9.73 million
27. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.)$9.30 million
28. Rep. Tom Petri (R-Wis.)$9.11 million
29. Rep. Chris Lee (R-N.Y.)$8.74 million
30. Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.)$8.51 million
31. Sen. Ted Kaufman (D-Del.)$8.48 million
32. Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.)$8.34 million
33. Rep. Parker Griffith (R-Ala.)$8.29 million
34. Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)$8.03 million
35. Rep. John Spratt (D-S.C.)$7.94 million
36. Rep. John Linder (R-Ga.)$7.90 million
37. Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.)$7.71 million
38. Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.)$7.33 million
39. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)$7.10 million
40. Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.)$6.90 million
41. Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.)$6.83 million
42. Rep. Steve Kagen (D-Wis.)$6.77 million
43. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)$6.74 million
44. Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.)$6.67 million
45. Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas)$6.66 million
46. Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)$6.31 million
47. Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)$6.22 million
48. Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.)$6.07 million
49. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.)$5.66 million
50. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)$5.34 million
51. Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.)$5.06 million

I am curious as to the source of these various wealth acquisitions. I can respect someone if they actually earned their wealth from owning/running a business vs being a trust baby or capitalizing on their speaker-fee/book royalties generating power as an elected official. I wonder what the breakdown between D's and R's is in that respect.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 01, 2010, 02:42:49 PM
Ami: nice stats. I agree with you wholeheartedly, but my concerns fell on deaf ears the 3 times I tried to live in Meadville. People just won't change. It's sad because there are a lot of good people in CC. Just no jobs or diversity.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 01, 2010, 04:02:13 PM
Grok, more than half are D but is this their worth WITHOUT their Warchest??? Contribution wise Dems got millions more than GOP. It doesn't matter... election 20-hours away...the money is moot. Just be sure to vote.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 01, 2010, 06:22:57 PM
For those that are interested, here is the link (http://www.rollcall.com/features/Guide-to-Congress_2010/guide/49892-1.html?page=1) to the article where I gleened the data from.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on November 01, 2010, 07:13:40 PM
Grok, more than half are D but is this their worth WITHOUT their Warchest??? Contribution wise Dems got millions more than GOP. It doesn't matter... election 20-hours away...the money is moot. Just be sure to vote.
Rest assured my wife and I have already voted absentee over 2 weeks ago as we both work over 1 1/2 hours driving distance from our polling place and our jobs preclude leaving the job locations to travel to and from the polls.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 01, 2010, 08:02:18 PM
I wish I had done the absentee thing, even tho I am not absent. Kinda not looking forward to going to the polls tomorrow.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 01, 2010, 08:19:06 PM
I like my polling place. Little one room schoolhouse.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: gore range on November 01, 2010, 08:45:11 PM
....haven't voted in my polling place in over 15 years since it took me 3 hours in line the first year there- it is in my local elementary school...........while school is in session ::) ....

....done the absentee ballot ever since and conveniently drop it off over at the county clerk's office a week or so prior to election day ;D ....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 01, 2010, 08:49:25 PM
I vote at a church about a mile away.  It's not really out of the way and they get most of their voters before 10 and after 6. I make it during the slow times so it all works out for me.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on November 01, 2010, 09:26:32 PM
I just miss getting the festive "I Voted " sticker to give to my daughter (who LOVES stickers).LOL.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 01, 2010, 09:38:30 PM
Funny, my daughter gets the sticker too.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 01, 2010, 09:49:41 PM
I've taken my daughter May and November since she's been born. She gets the sticker too. We talk about philosophies of governance in small ways here and there. I'm hoping to raise a fierce Libertarian . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 01, 2010, 10:04:34 PM
We used to take our daughter, too. She even pulled the lever for Daddy when she was little.  One room schoolhouse? That does sound like fun, Life!! But.. it IS a schoolhouse.. lol lol


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 02, 2010, 12:24:32 AM
Ok, maybe poor was a "poor" choice of words

not really. If you look at the poorest counties there's enough that vote GOP to make your point valid.
In this county, 87% of the schoolkids are on subsidized breakfast and lunch, and are eating manteca sandwiches on weekends.
High poverty rate, and it seems a huge number are on SS, foodstamps or public assistance of some sort, yet they rail against the welfare state and vote GOP religiously.
Go figure


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 02, 2010, 07:57:37 AM
To some it seems a chore to vote, to others it is a time to get out in the Community...to me, this is a second CHRISTMAS for me. I go in, Give Santa my "list" and sometime after 8PM I begin to see what kind of presents I get.
 
Truthfully, I get excited. I don't sleep well the night before and bite my lips until my wife comes home so we can go to our polling station. I placed my "bets" on my horses quite a while ago and am now at the Mutuel. I cannot understand and frankly find it hard to believe there are truly "undecided" walking up to the machine. When I am told by anyone maybe a week before, that they had no idea.... I take my finger..... NO NOT THAT!!!! .... I take my finger and pull down the lower lid on one of my eyes and look at them and smile.... A gesture many ethnics would understand as a "don't BS me" signal.
 
I will go in the booth and for everyone I vote for I will say a  silent thank you to those who serve(d) and died for my right to do this.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 02, 2010, 07:59:53 AM
I will go in the booth and for everyone I vote for I will say a  silent thank you to those who serve(d) and died for my right to do this.

I think I will do that today too.  And thank you Lifetime.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 02, 2010, 08:04:12 AM
I will vote. I have only missed voting once since I was old enough to. I am somewhat put out with the evolution of campaign tactics I have seen, at least where I live. There has not been a great deal of focus on what the issues at hand are. The focus here seems to be on what an untrustworthy individual their opponent is. Sometimes I think there is more sincerity in student council elections.

I will vote though.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 02, 2010, 08:24:19 AM
You can take back a dress, sometimes even a car, you can take back something broke..... but words are just too darned hard to take back...
 
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69929420101101 (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69929420101101)
 
 
Am I an enemy of Americans?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 02, 2010, 08:33:03 AM
Yeah I saw that little slip he made. I thought the word of the week for that has been "detractors" for the past few decades. Either way, calling members of congress enemies is a pretty large slip.

Are you an enemy of the state Lifetime? I think not.  Are you passionate about your beliefs and value system? More than most I would say.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 02, 2010, 12:07:26 PM
Quote
One room schoolhouse? That does sound like fun, Life!! But.. it IS a schoolhouse.. lol lol


I actually don't have a problem with one room schoolhouses. That particular 'model' of education wasn't a bad one.

I spent a lot of time with write-ins today. It was pretty obvious to the folks there too as the machine beeps every time you touch the screen. (beepbeepbeepbeepbeeepbeep beepbeep . . . "Wow Dad - you sure are votin'!") The only person I voted for listed on the ballot was Brad Roae. Decent fellow.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 02, 2010, 12:49:43 PM
The Myth of the Wasted Vote (http://jeffryfisher.net/statesman/SnT/Wasted.htm)
 
You want change? Quit votin' for R's and D's.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 02, 2010, 12:54:00 PM
I went to my precinct to see what the turnout was..... around Noon. Not good at all.... 2 precincts utilize the room and they may have had a total of 80..... My precinct has approx 550 registered voters and their total, about noon was 32. I am going back to vote with my wife later so will check the totals.
 
I noticedthere were no poll watchers and only one sign in the ground across the street. Maybe the voters haven't woke up by Noon.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 02, 2010, 01:03:54 PM
Sorry if I find that as someone just telling someone who to vote for. Have you ever seen the ballots in some European Countries? ??? 10 or more parties and.... the Governments have seats for them. I agree we have problems but I am of the old school..... K.I.S.S. Life is confusing enough to the point many couldn't even name the VPOTUS let alone all the candidates in the R-D-I system.
 
Tell you what.... you keep writing in your votes for your I's and I will do my best to pick a good one from the R-D and you and I can go for a drink when one of your candidates hits an office of Fed level. Jesse Ventura.... a joke and Minn still look at him like that, Lieberman is scared to drop his Dem Caucus.... Even Crist says he would Caucus with the GOP and they didn't even pick him....  If R + D is a crapshoot.... God knows what the I's really are. Our election process is already a cesspool and now you want to add even more "solid waste" to it.... Good luck with that....
 
 
The Myth of the Wasted Vote ([url]http://jeffryfisher.net/statesman/SnT/Wasted.htm[/url])
 
You want change? Quit votin' for R's and D's.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 02, 2010, 01:42:44 PM
The lesser of two evils still results in evil . . . there's better options out there . . .
 
Perhaps if more folks understood where the paradigm comes from. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 02, 2010, 03:59:43 PM
I voted. It wasn't busy at all.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 02, 2010, 04:16:09 PM
Again....please inform us of a better choice???? You just throw another name of an Unknown in the mix. If the only way to locate these candidates is on the internet, you just explained why your choice may NEVER see the oath bible. If you are only voting for them because they are not R or D... it is n difference in  my small world to vote for  R or D just because it isn't the other. Who would your candidate caucus with, what committees do you really think they will get if they would be elected and how much backing would they get on a sponsored bill short of naming a PO or public Bath House. You need more than ONE to do anything and I am not seeing the swell. Do what you want, I give you credit, but to me.... what you are doing is no more than the rest of us.... voting.... one is NO better than the other and there are so many shortcomings in it ALL.
 
Good Luck...
 
 
The lesser of two evils still results in evil . . . there's better options out there . . .
 
Perhaps if more folks understood where the paradigm comes from.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 02, 2010, 05:51:58 PM
No voting for an lesser known or an independent is not always a better choice, but sometimes it is. I voted for Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Independents and even one Tea partier today. I was sadly disappointed by our choices for governor in Florida this year from the big parties. A choice between evil and wicked came to mind.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 02, 2010, 06:11:32 PM
In all of this banter is... to NOT vote is a "wasted vote". Vote for whom you believe in....
 
 
No voting for an lesser known or an independent is not always a better choice, but sometimes it is. I voted for Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Independents and even one Tea partier today. I was sadly disappointed by our choices for governor in Florida this year from the big parties. A choice between evil and wicked came to mind.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 02, 2010, 07:30:58 PM
Total deadsville at my polling place.  About a 10% turnout as of about noon when I stopped by.  Hope that people came later in the day cause I found that astonishing.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 02, 2010, 08:05:58 PM
We had about 900 at my polling place at 4:30.  It was about double the turnout the primary had.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 02, 2010, 08:13:47 PM
I have heard that turnout is higher than expected in Crawford County.  Polls are closed here at 7 still?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 02, 2010, 08:17:17 PM
Polls closed at 8.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 03, 2010, 08:04:35 AM
Christmas came last night for me.... every name I touched on the screen will have the job. The one that had me worried was Toomey/Sestak but while looking... there was a low percentage of precincts in.
 
I gave my picks to my circle of friends and relatives almost a month ago... so they knew where I stood .... before shifting my feet. The only thing that would have changed that list.... dropping out or dying.
 
Now, that being said, short of the DEM ( no opposition ) they now have to pick up the "target" and place it over their heart or head. Their feet WILL be put to the coals...notice I said COAL LOL.. they have a hard job...which should include, sitting at the table that was either refused or blocked to construct answers and not walls. If this is truly what some look on as retaliation.... the same pox will visit next cycle.
 
I don't look at this as GOP CONTROL in any way.... I look at it as a door... now the GOP has it in their House. They better be ready for work 21 Jan.
 
Nationally.... we lost some butwe gained more. I am hoping the GOP GOV. push to CLEAN UP the Gerrymandered mess that was put in over a decade ago. K.I.S.S. isn't just an action or a band on platform shoes licking their eyebrows.... it is a very good principle.
 
stepping off the box......
 
 
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 03, 2010, 12:21:37 PM
Nice post Lifetime. My sentiments exactly.
 
We elected an unknown as Governor, masquerading as a Republican. It is going to get very interesting here...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 03, 2010, 01:10:43 PM
Please 'splain to us how a man who was elected Attorney General, from 04 to present is unknown? And you say he is a RINO?? Sounds funny to me when he helped Bush the Younger in his campaign as well as many other GOP. I would think he would have truly been outed BEFORE throwing his hat in to the GUB ring.
 
And you insinuate that Onerato was a BETTER choice??? Don't throw some schlub INDI in the mix.... that dog won't hunt in the real world.
 
Well no matter... an unofficial difference of approx 350,000 to over 450,000 votes seems to show some people they feel they can trust Corbett...
 
He will be in for 4 years...times 2.... if re-elected. We all live with it...
 
I think PA did well and nothing is ever perfect for everyone..I even like Barletta of Hazelton PA now in Congress. I loved his dealings with illegal aliens in his town as Mayor. The dust hasn't settled yet and no one is really in their positions besides the one in Obama's old Sen Seat.
 
Now we will see...
 
 
 
 
 
 
Nice post Lifetime. My sentiments exactly.
 
We elected an unknown as Governor, masquerading as a Republican. It is going to get very interesting here...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 03, 2010, 02:11:33 PM
Lifetime:

TiFe's Governor elect is Rubio. He lives in Florida.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 03, 2010, 02:26:19 PM
Marco Rubio is the senator, Rick Scott is the new Governor of Florida.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on November 03, 2010, 04:18:56 PM
In Florida, the choice came down to a corporate crook and an inept business officer. Florida chose the crook. His big plan is what he calls "accountability budgeting". This involves "tax relief" (the details of which he has not outlined), and REMOVING anti-growth regulations. So that we can build MORE houses that no one will buy, and more strip malls that will sit empty, because there has been a mass exodus out of this state over the period of the last few years, which is how the tax base so drastically decreased, and the state's finances suffered. Our economy is based on the service industry and is construction, food-service, and hospitality oriented, and as a result, large portions of our population are transitory. So Rick Scott needs to figure out how to diversify the sectors that bring in revenue to increase the tax base by a) luring people back to Florida, especially young families looking to set down permanent roots, and b) how to bring tourists in to support the sectors that already make up the backbone of the state economy while building those other sectors (technology and communications being absolutely vital). The kicker is, Scott's "Government and Accountability" plan for the state outlines rewarding "high performing" state employees...among whom I am counted when it works to the state's advantage (federal stimulus funding), but when justifying no raises to state university system employees whose salaries are funded directly from state taxpayer dollars, Tallahassee will claim that we are not, in fact, state employees. I'll wait to see if Scott plays that same game. Most of the "platforms" on his website are oversimplified bulletpoints that parrot the same old trite and unfulfilled promises of every empty suit that came before him. But at least he won't have an unused office down the hall from me and insist that the temperature in this building be kept at 65 degrees.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 03, 2010, 04:22:35 PM
Hey Sorry all.... I forget everyones original location.... Forgive me or bury me  ;)
 
 
 
 
Lifetime:

TiFe's Governor elect is Rubio. He lives in Florida.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 03, 2010, 04:24:50 PM
I guess a good reason not to move  ;) to "God's Waitingroom"


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 03, 2010, 04:32:17 PM
I don't know what's happening in Florida.

I thought Walt Disney was running things for a while there . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 03, 2010, 06:47:48 PM
LOL no... he is running California... hmmmm or is that Stanley Owsley???? ;)
 
 
I don't know what's happening in Florida.

I thought Walt Disney was running things for a while there . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 03, 2010, 11:27:36 PM
In Florida, the choice came down to a corporate crook and an inept business officer. Florida chose the crook. His big plan is what he calls "accountability budgeting". This involves "tax relief" (the details of which he has not outlined

that "not outlined"  part seems to be popular.

the question is whats it gonna cost? I would think they have some idea, or maybe not.

hard to be an informed voter without the answer.

 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 04, 2010, 06:43:06 AM
I didn't vote for Scott
In Florida, the choice came down to a corporate crook and an inept business officer. Florida chose the crook. His big plan is what he calls "accountability budgeting". This involves "tax relief" (the details of which he has not outlined), and REMOVING anti-growth regulations. So that we can build MORE houses that no one will buy, and more strip malls that will sit empty, because there has been a mass exodus out of this state over the period of the last few years, which is how the tax base so drastically decreased, and the state's finances suffered. Our economy is based on the service industry and is construction, food-service, and hospitality oriented, and as a result, large portions of our population are transitory. So Rick Scott needs to figure out how to diversify the sectors that bring in revenue to increase the tax base by a) luring people back to Florida, especially young families looking to set down permanent roots, and b) how to bring tourists in to support the sectors that already make up the backbone of the state economy while building those other sectors (technology and communications being absolutely vital). The kicker is, Scott's "Government and Accountability" plan for the state outlines rewarding "high performing" state employees...among whom I am counted when it works to the state's advantage (federal stimulus funding), but when justifying no raises to state university system employees whose salaries are funded directly from state taxpayer dollars, Tallahassee will claim that we are not, in fact, state employees. I'll wait to see if Scott plays that same game. Most of the "platforms" on his website are oversimplified bulletpoints that parrot the same old trite and unfulfilled promises of every empty suit that came before him. But at least he won't have an unused office down the hall from me and insist that the temperature in this building be kept at 65 degrees.

I didn't vote for Scott (or Sink) as I don't believe either one had what it takes to be a governor. I hope I am proven wrong. I hope he is smart enought to surround himself with the appropriate people (rather than GOB's)  who will work as need to solve the problems here.

On separate note... I'm still chuckling about the senate race in Alaska where write in Murkowski is leading in the returns. I don't can't remember if something like this has ever happened in my lifetime.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 04, 2010, 07:41:35 AM
The count in Alaska isn't over and won't be for a while.... Murkowski isn't necessarily the leader... unless the counting is done and the process over to get the number. Remember, there was a push to add many, many "write-in " names...not necessarily MURKOWSKI. So, now they have to wait until a sufficient Write Ins to establish her share and possibly winning.
 
And yes, the WRITE IN full time Candidate did win once.. in a situation just like this... Strom Thurmond 1954 South Carolina. The other was when all candidates had to be written in and the term was 2 months in a special election 1946 California ...William Knowland.
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 04, 2010, 10:05:11 AM
No it's not over yet.  It's interesting though. No it hasn't happened in my lifetime as I was born after 1954.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 04, 2010, 12:33:45 PM
Beanie: I'm in the same boat as you. I worked for the university systems for 15 years (UF and FSU) and most of the rest of my tenure in the state of Fl as a state employee. I don't kno where they are going to cut. We have NEVER had enough employees to get everything done (strictly prohibited from working overtime or getting comp time, fireable offense if you do) and we are cut to the bone. I don't print anything, have no office supplies and , get this, we got an email last week asking people to pool PAPER CLIPS because we were running low in the central office supply room. I kid you not, we have to sign out every pencil, piece of paper or box of paper clips.
Scotts plan is to cut department of corrections, which is woefully understaffed to begin with. I hope and pray for the best, and now we have "R" in all the cabinet positions and controlling the House and Senate with supermajorities.
 
Someone has to get something done. They can't blame it on the Dems or the state employees anymore. We rank last in the US in staff per capita and in salaries (adjusted).
 
But we totally rock.  :P


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 04, 2010, 03:52:42 PM
Isn't have a herd of people running around making piles of paper clips more expensive then just buying them? I have used maybe 20 paper clips in the almost 10 years I have in at my job. Obviously the decree didn't come from Scott since he hasn't taken office yet. I didn't vote for him but I'll give him a chance. I gave I didn't vote for Obama but I gave him a chance too.

Let's circle back in 2 years and take the temperature again.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: TiFeMb on November 04, 2010, 05:25:56 PM
NP: I meant that we already are cut to the bone and yes, it's pointless to nickle and dime the office supplies. We have a lot of legacy files that we have to process and store, hence the need for copious amounts of paper clips.
Hey, I am rooting for Scott. I have to, running him down won't help any cause.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on November 04, 2010, 05:51:14 PM
Thanks Pennsylvanians for putting Toomey in.  He will most likely be a great one for You and the Country at large.  I feel he will be guided by Spiritual and Constitutional principles, but the future will tell.  Just an opinion from a Conservative and a "red neck, tea bagger". :)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 04, 2010, 06:54:06 PM
HEY!!!! Nuttin' wrong with a Conservative, Redneck, Tea Partier....
 
I never fail to ask how anyone can enjoy calling themselves teabagger or accept being called one...Is there anyone out there that knows it is a derogatory reference to having a scrotum slapped against your face? ??? ? It ain't funny...think of someone calling your child that....not so funny now huh? ??? ?
 
 
Thanks Pennsylvanians for putting Toomey in.  He will most likely be a great one for You and the Country at large.  I feel he will be guided by Spiritual and Constitutional principles, but the future will tell.  Just an opinion from a Conservative and a "red neck, tea bagger". :)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 04, 2010, 07:26:30 PM
Quote
Is there anyone out there that knows it is a derogatory reference to having a scrotum slapped against your face?

Nope.  Don't think I need that tidbit of info either, lol.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on November 04, 2010, 08:51:05 PM
NP and TiFeMb, have you seen Scott's "transition team" roster? It's chock-full of Tally "insiders" such as former Bush cabinet members (Jeb's former chief of staff), a couple of lawyers (on who actually represented him), and even the wife of a man who is the founder of one of the state's largest lobbying firms. So much for the anti-lobby and "Tallahassee outsider" platforms he prided himself on during his campaign.  ::)

TiFeMb, I feel your pain. I work in the USF system. I'm lucky that we had enough reserves stockpiled that we didn't have to take too big of a hit in each of our multiple and progressively more difficult budget cut activities (I work in the budget office, so I have hands-on involvement in drafting scenarios and actually submitting paperwork to initiate these reductions to our units). But I've watched as we've had to increasingly rely on non-tenured adjuncts more and more, and they're great instructors, but they often lack the experience and credentials (and sometimes the dedication) of tenured or full-time tenure track faculty. If the federal stimulus funding ends after this year, and state funds are not provided to cover the loss - and enrollment drops off by any margin - quite a few of our classes just kind of disappear. Because we will not be able to hire even part-time instructors to teach them. Staff are overworked and underfunded, so morale is in the toilet. I do have enough to buy office supplies, but I've always been frugal, so my budget dollars (all $2,000 in operational funding for three people) go pretty far (as long as we don't break anything! *crosses fingers*). I love my campus, I have a supportive (if sometimes frustrating) supervisor, I'm pretty good at what I do, and I want to help make my institution the best it can be. But our state's financial future is in the hands of people who shortsightedly only see how to impact the bottom line by reducing spending. It's what Crist did. And that turned out so well for him...and us.

(FWIW, I don't think very much of Alex Sink either, since she was the CFO during much of the worst of our budget troubles over the last couple of years...but maybe she would've picked a strong cabinet to adviser her. Or maybe not - we'll just never know.)

Edited because there is no "h" in "Crist".



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on November 04, 2010, 09:07:47 PM
I think Hillary Clinton came up with that slogan.  It may have been another DemocRAT that said it though.  LIFE, you, or GORE might remember the reference of it.  I know they called we Tea Partiers,"tea baggers" but I may be wrong on the "red neck" part!  Who can remember all the lies, spins, and distorted words coming from our "leaders" on both sides of the isle!  :(   :(   Transparency WILL be increasing on all levels including our government, and a lot of corruption and deceit will be brought forth and exposed from now on.  It will be much more difficult for deceit and corruption to be hidden.  This is all part of the Purification going on and Ascension of the Earth, it's inhabitants, institutions etc.  (I couldn't help throwing in my "mumbo jumbo" Spiritual take from current Channeled info.  ;D )


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 04, 2010, 09:11:54 PM
So are you on the 2 year, one month and 17 day plan ICU?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 04, 2010, 09:15:10 PM
I'll still give Scott a chance. He's chances will be shorted lived than others, but everybody gets a chance with me.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 04, 2010, 09:33:33 PM
I went to a town hall meeting hosted by Michelle Brooks and Brad Roae this evening. They were surprised at the level of turnout. I was disappointed. I think I'm done with hangin' out on the sidelines.

Hey Lifetime - you said you regularly meet with legislators - is it formal one on one things, talking with them at functions, hangin out in the office - what do you mean? How do you get your ideas across?
 
(I got a lot of 'em . . . I'm curious to see how far ouside the box folks are willing to entertain a thought.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: gore range on November 04, 2010, 10:07:47 PM
... GORE might remember the reference of it...  .

....I do, very clearly.....but, fortunately.....my sanity has been restored :D .....


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 04, 2010, 11:58:16 PM
According to the Office of management & Budgets and the Congressional Budget Office the proposed Tax cuts are expected to increase the National Debt by $5 trillion, and by as much as $9 trillion depending on scenario. None of the candidates spoke of costs.
The problem remains the imbalance between revenue and spending.
 
the relevant links:
(http://taxprof.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4eab53ef013488945d4b970c-800wi)
 
http://www.ombwatch.org/node/11353 (http://www.ombwatch.org/node/11353)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Zipper on November 05, 2010, 12:09:44 AM
"I went to a town hall meeting hosted by Michelle Brooks and Brad Roae this evening. They were surprised at the level of turnout. I was disappointed. I think I'm done with hangin' out on the sidelines. "


`Splain, please. :)

Was it a good turnout or a bad one?

And.. by not hanging on the sidelines does that mean you're going to throw a hat into the ring?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2010, 07:32:14 AM
Having said that.... has the derogatory term's use to describe the Tea Partiers amused you or has it's use been ignored by you, or do YOU say anything to people who use the term? If that was some info you didn't think you needed then it "ain't" something said in school or church I would think...then why are people so complacent when it is heard on the radio, tv or even written in a venue such as this??
 
I am no prude to "salty language" but it is usually used in CONTEXT to the people/group addressed. This word has no relationship to the target it has been laid upon, yet it seems accepted.
 
Maybe that TIDBIT of info is needed, if just to let those who don't know and chuckle when they hear it. Now even though you didn't know it.... you at least, " now know the rest of the story."
 
I apologize to you for mentioning body parts instead of "salty
language". My thought was, we are adults in here and did go through a modicum of "Health Class" in school. Forgive me if I assumed too much.
 
 
Quote
Is there anyone out there that knows it is a derogatory reference to having a scrotum slapped against your face?

Nope.  Don't think I need that tidbit of info either, lol.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 05, 2010, 07:37:51 AM
In response to Zip (and in general) -
 
Well - they were pleased there were more folks there than they thought would be. I thought there should be more folks there than there were. Probably 50 - 60 folks I suppose.

I can't run for office as I'm a civil servant, but - I can become more involved with the 'process' of things.

I've been thinking a lot about context and structure lately . . .

If you think of government as a large game of Chinese Checkers - every so often we pick the marbles that go on the board. The marbles always start off in the same spots, some you take off, some you put back . . . but the board doesn't change. Part of the problem is the marbles, but the real problem is the board.

If enough folks like Chinese Checkers - the board won't change. Seems we as a populace want our cake and wanna eat it too.

Emails don't tend to reach candidates as they get a LOT of them each day. It's gonna be setting up meetings, going to townhalls (but even that's just a snippet of thought / time) and participating in work groups (which I think would be the best use of my time and thought processes) if there is such a thing.
 
I'm an idea kind of guy. Perhaps I shouldn't sit on 'em.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 05, 2010, 07:38:41 AM
Quote
Having said that.... has the derogatory term's use to describe the Tea Partiers amused you or has it's use been ignored by you, or do YOU say anything to people who use the term? If that was some info you didn't think you needed then it "ain't" something said in school or church I would think...then why are people so complacent when it is heard on the radio, tv or even written in a venue such as this??

Maybe people don't get mad or say anything because, like me, they have no idea about the meaning behind the words? 

You'll have to get a lot "saltier" than scrotum to offend me Lifetime. :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 05, 2010, 07:40:04 AM
Is a scrotum more or less than a quorum?

I can't remember.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 05, 2010, 07:46:17 AM
Life, I am right there with you.  This election season has pushed me into thinking of becoming more involved in the process of things.  My sisters BF works at the courthouse and got involved after watching and listening for a while.....he ran a state rep campaign for some guy a couple times.  I don't know if I really want to be part of the "process" or if I just want to understand better or both or what.  But I feel this pull to get involved.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 05, 2010, 07:49:14 AM
:D  A quorum is not a specific number so I can't tell ya.  You are badder than bad.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2010, 07:57:32 AM
All 3. Some are personal friends, some I am on committees so attend scheduled meetings that they schedule, some attend scheduled meetings I am a part of, as attendees, at their offices, for business as well as particular reasons. I can work with them and I do, so realizing that they don't fall into my way of thinking 100%. LOL even Spouses have less success than I do with our legislators on issues I bring up.
 
One thing I have found is that ANYONE can do the same and yet they think, for whatever reason, they can't. As long as you act human and respectful... it can be done. I have found that most animosity toward Legislators is because your Ox got gored. After that, instead of meeting with them and explaining your view...you tend to walk away PO'd and feeling that person would NEVER help you. Before I get to that point, I make sure I know exactly where we both stand and how much of what I might need, is still within my targeted results. One thing that does make for bile in my throat, is when I am forced to eat the whole plate of what i don't like as opposed to a bite or so. Relativity and patience. ( I will admit, I am not a very patient person  :)  )
 
When you talk to them, I remember who they were BEFORE and that they put their pants on like I do or..Dress on like my wife. They have families and deal with many things we do, just to get from monday to tuesday..... the plumber, kids grades, mother's health... When they look at themselves as members of the ELITE, it is at that time they need to be told who they work FOR, as THEIR employees. " don't eat all the fingers off the hand that feeds you." But I try not to get that far if I can.
 
All in all... they can be approachable and can be talked to unless you start asking them where the Aliens are at, from the Roswell Crash  ;)  .. Even though I knew all the legislators involved in the VA Clinic inception up to naming.... it may have taken 4-5 years of sitting and talking to get what we have and it is still going on as I am typing, to expand what is there... Politics goes beyond Elected officials. A means to an end.
 
 
 
 
 
I went to a town hall meeting hosted by Michelle Brooks and Brad Roae this evening. They were surprised at the level of turnout. I was disappointed. I think I'm done with hangin' out on the sidelines.

Hey Lifetime - you said you regularly meet with legislators - is it formal one on one things, talking with them at functions, hangin out in the office - what do you mean? How do you get your ideas across?
 
(I got a lot of 'em . . . I'm curious to see how far ouside the box folks are willing to entertain a thought.)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2010, 08:04:02 AM
Well if the quorum you seek can't be down one or two... YOU HAVE A MEETING  ;) .
 
 
 
Is a scrotum more or less than a quorum?

I can't remember.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2010, 08:06:16 AM
I attend meetings where you need a specified number of officers and members to have a Quorum.
 
 
:D  A quorum is not a specific number so I can't tell ya.  You are badder than bad.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 05, 2010, 08:38:21 AM
"The :egislators could not reach a vote as there was not a scrotum among them."

----------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the answer to my question Lifetime - I appreciate it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2010, 08:46:31 AM
Now ... recess is over.... back to the Tea Party and what we tend to accept.... do we need a Quorum of scrotums?  :huh:
 
 
"The :egislators could not reach a vote as there was not a scrotum among them."

----------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the answer to my question Lifetime - I appreciate it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 05, 2010, 09:01:49 AM
How many does it take to form a quorum?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2010, 09:14:47 AM
Serious??? It varies from By-Law to By-Law... some only ONE officer and specified membership, others just certain amount of the body... A quorum is set by the org.
 
 
How many does it take to form a quorum?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 05, 2010, 09:46:38 AM
It's a rhetorical question. It's also rather esoteric on my part because it's a term that I hear and use almost daily at work. I suppose I was only amusing myself with that post.

Sorry.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2010, 09:52:46 AM
We went off topic and we already know of two Tea Partiers in the room... one said he was a Red Neck to boot. I am not a fullflegged member, but I attend the rallies and am on a few Email Trees. Like all things... you take what you need from the source. Do I agree with all they say or focus on...? not all. I have always believed Abortion should not be in politics..it should be in the home and church. If logic follows the thought...then Capitol Punishment should be Federaly banned and not State decisions. And it can get to be a politically/financial quagmire.
 
Some I agree with.... in my home, you cannot spend more than you make if you want to remain solvent..so, why do we ALLOW our Gov't to do that??
 
Now ... recess is over.... back to the Tea Party and what we tend to accept.... do we need a Quorum of scrotums?  :huh:
 
 
"The :egislators could not reach a vote as there was not a scrotum among them."

----------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the answer to my question Lifetime - I appreciate it.
Serious??? It varies from By-Law to By-Law... some only ONE officer and specified membership, others just certain amount of the body... A quorum is set by the org.
 
 
How many does it take to form a quorum?

...so if recess is over...then how many do you need to get back to the Tea Party... :huh: ...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 05, 2010, 12:43:39 PM
Well some work with UNO
 
 
...Sooooo...the answer would be...TWO... ??? ... ;D ... ;) ...


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 05, 2010, 03:12:54 PM
Not exactly Administration oriented, but interesting:
 
Keith Olbermann suspended for political donations. (http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/05/olbermann-suspended-from-msnbc-for-campaign-donations/?partner=rss&emc=rss)
 
I disagree with this action. It's part of a person's right to free speech. Msnbc states it violated their standards of journalism, which makes this an utter oxymoron. for an industry relying on the First Amendment for their right to report and even EXIST - they deny that right to a person on their staff (though a blatantly partisan person) under the auspices of protecting their standards?!
 
Like I said - interesting. I wouldn't care if anyone gave money to a political campaign because it's their right to do so. To do that THEN hawk their campaign on TV . . .under the guise of unbiased journalism - well, I could see that as a bit of an issue, but then - everyone knows who he was rooting for - why shouldn't he be allowed to give 'em money too?
 
Don't get me wrong - I think olbermann is a bitter tool of a human being, but i disagree with msnbc's treatment of him and the reason for it. (I think there's another reason that's not being voiced.)
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 05, 2010, 06:56:09 PM
I totally agree with you Life BUT if it is policy and he knew it was policy and broke policy then they should follow protocol and do whatever protocol calls for.  There are a lot of dumb "rules" and standards in my line of work that seem pointless and senseless to me but I signed a paper stating I understood the policies and would uphold the standards set by the company so if I break my end of the bargain and get disciplined for it am I supposed to be pissed?  And should anyone feel sorry for me?  No.  It is what it is.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on November 05, 2010, 08:01:37 PM
So are you on the 2 year, one month and 17 day plan ICU?
......... NIGHT, If you mean that in 2012, that the Earth will be destroyed and us with it, like some believe. NO WAY.  A number of people, including some clergy, will be duped into believing this, but WE and the Earth will still be here.  Most all the Spiritual information and "channeled" wisdom, tells what is really happening.  For those with OPEN MINDS, you can get a flavor of what is happening by signing up to the free websites:  www.spiritlibrary.com (http://www.spiritlibrary.com/) and www.lightworker.com (http://www.lightworker.com/).  If you sign up for the lightworker site, go to the Evolution Center, (Find it on the home page and click on) and check out the videos explaining things.  Steve Rother is a reputable Channeler of "the group".  Those "holy rollers" and those that think that every word of the Bible is "absolute truth", has not had some original sections taken out or changed, and every word and concept must be taken literally without exception, NEED NOT APPLY.  Sorry for the hijack, but I just wanted to answer your question.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 05, 2010, 10:28:37 PM
I don't care much for Olbermann but I do agree it's pretty hypocritical on msnbc's part.

So does anyone know why Obama is (allegedly) taking an immense entourage and enough firepower to flatten a few third world countries with him on his trip to India? This seems to have surfaced recently all over but there's no supporting documentation for it. Granted the presidents security detail is never discussed, but still these things have a way of getting out.

IC2ITUC, II somehow knew you'd know what I was talking about.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 05, 2010, 11:14:31 PM
The U.S. wants to use India as a counterbalance to China. Increase trade with India reduces trade with China.
The U.S. is the worlds largest economy by a large margin. Why not leverage that to our advantage.
Despite solid efforts Japan hasn't wanted to partner with us.
India and Brazil are very logical choices since their economies combined are half of China's.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: IC2ITUC on November 05, 2010, 11:50:17 PM
"IC2ITUC, II somehow knew you'd know what I was talking about."....NIGHT,  ALL Minds are connected, as I think you are aware of.   :)   No response needed.  As for Obama's trip to India and the expense to ALL OF US FROM OUR TAX MONEY,  :( , he is Milking the "perks" of the Office for all it's worth even though this country is BANKRUPT.  I don't think that a Republican President would be so extravagant during these poor economic times.  If he/she did, the DemocRAT run press would be all over the Republican, but the "anointed one" will get a pass, of course.  As I said, watch in the near future, these types of things will be a thing of the past, thank God.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 06, 2010, 11:00:19 AM
Excuse me if I might appear foggy on this.... but..... even now.... the USA is still the worlds largest CONSUMER??? So... what do we need to export to India??? Beef???? I am trying to figure out what the Indians need that we will make that in turn ...will make our economy make a blip??? I could be wrong... but electronics?.. They make laptops for less than $100 with Eastern Parts and not mention who you end up on the help line fore say, Dell... "Hallo, Thees ees Ralpf from Mumbia, how can I help you?" Cars... this is the country trying to sell us the TA-TA?? Food products? Ahhhh yes ...we can make Saris. Do we sell them Air Scrubbers or maybe Water Purification Plants... I am sorry... having problems seeing an upside here. Military I understand but Economic but for us being a market for THEIR stuff, as Carlin would call it.
 
 Help me understand this.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 06, 2010, 11:04:48 AM
I suspect since we are on good terms with India and manufacturing jobs shifted there a somewhat serious crunch would be felt on China's already overvalued currency.  I really don't know though. There's a motive in there somewhere or maybe it's too obvious for me to see.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 06, 2010, 11:24:41 AM
I think it is Military more than regular economics.... We are the worlds largest Arms Dealer and if we supply them with stuff we make... it is easier to establish our own military presence... but i don't see us selling them Curry and Rice.
 
I suspect since we are on good terms with India and manufacturing jobs shifted there a somewhat serious crunch would be felt on China's already overvalued currency.  I really don't know though. There's a motive in there somewhere or maybe it's too obvious for me to see.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on November 06, 2010, 01:34:06 PM
I'm thinking, as Lifetime said, it's less economics, more global security...if it's even happening as reported (which I guess is something like 'Taxpayers are spending $200 million a day and the U.S. Navy is providing 34 warships to send Barack Obama to India'**).

Okay, so India is next to Pakistan, and they share a sort of tenuous "peace agreement", which is always at risk. And Pakistan, similar to Afghanistan, is often a hotbed of radicals and anti-West rhetoric, so it's in the Unite States' best interests to have positive relations with India *and* Pakistan, to bridge the cultural enmity that exists there. And yes, it's been reported that India is looking to buy some defense weapons. We just sold a bunch of jets and attack helicopters to Saudi Arabia (to the tune of some $60 billion dollars), so I'm sure this trip probably has multiple purposes, including trade and arms sales.

All of that aside, India has over 17% of the world's population (and is steadily increasing), and that means a growing consumer base of young, educated, tech-savvy buyers. Selling them on the "American lifestyle" might be the selling point that causes them to buy US-manufactured goods (technology, specifically), over Japanese or the cheaper Chinese products? I found a blog post that addressed this, which I'd dismiss because it's a blog, except for the fact that it included links to sources and whatnot that basically states that India%u2019s trade with the US last year was approx. $37 billion and that India's ambassador believes that this trade will grow to be around $50 billion a year by early next year (meaning an increase of 30% over 2009 levels). Why exactly are people so upset by a trade mission that may be part of reaching a goal that can really only benefit us, long term? What am I missing (aside from the obvious, which has more to do with people's cultural attitudes about East India than economic or political realities)?

**I couldn't find a damn shred of anything to actually support this (anyone have a non-Hannity/Limbaugh/Beck link?). However, I did find that a spokesman for the Pentagon DID make a statement regarding this: "I will take the liberty this time of dismissing as absolutely absurd  this notion that somehow we were deploying 10 percent of the Navy, some  40 ships and an aircraft carrier to support the president%u2018s trip to  Asia.  That's just comical.  Nothing close to that is being done." (this is a transcript of a video clip of Pentagon Spokesman Geoff Morrell)

Link regarding the trade claims and the recent sale of arms to the Saudis, for those who may care to read:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-US-trade-will-reach-50-billion-this-fiscal-Shankar/Article1-621741.aspx (http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-US-trade-will-reach-50-billion-this-fiscal-Shankar/Article1-621741.aspx)

http://www.defencetalk.com/us-announces-massive-arms-sale-to-saudi-arabia-29579/ (http://www.defencetalk.com/us-announces-massive-arms-sale-to-saudi-arabia-29579/)





 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 07, 2010, 11:51:22 PM
Actually that fuss over Obama's India trips expense seems to be a diversion from the proposed $5 trillion increase in the national debt over current forecasted levels.
Thats more than 5 times the cost of the bailout.
 
$200 million a day indeed.
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 08, 2010, 11:44:27 AM
Well... this article (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jDhWNvj-KgnXtfilvMa-8VXMjwiA?docId=8376ef7584f149fcb19a68f67f9fae29) seems to indicate that Obama is exporting something, though I'm not quite sure what and for how long we will benefit. In the end though I bet we lose.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 08, 2010, 12:20:19 PM
He's exporting his own bulshit.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 08, 2010, 12:29:09 PM
Hmm, I wonder what the tarriff rate per ton is on that?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: GROK on November 08, 2010, 02:03:50 PM
He's exporting his own bulshit.

Well then, if that is the case, I do give him credit for putting his money where his mouth is (please perceive the dripping sarcasm). He is realizing his dream of exporting an infinitely (so it seems) renewable resource.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 08, 2010, 02:20:03 PM
Hmmm, looks like Keith Olbermann goes back to work tomorrow. I bet that was an interesting phone call.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: beanie on November 08, 2010, 10:03:09 PM
Considering the names of the companies mentioned in that link...

It goes back to technology, which younger, increasingly savvy Indian consumers are interested in (my manager/CFO is from India, and sometimes goes on little jags about the changing socioeconomic and political climates there). And then there's national defense. As long as the goods to be exported are being manufactured here, by US corporations, in our factories...we're not talking about outsourcing customer service jobs, so I guess I'm the only one even the least bit optimistic about the potential here?  :-\


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 08, 2010, 10:31:08 PM
Watched my fav, W., on NBC this evening with Matt Lauer.
Still can't stand him, but he does seem a little more human. :D


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: OL FATTY on November 09, 2010, 09:55:30 AM
Internet Warning!!!!!
 
If you get an e.mail notice that says "Nude photos of Nancy Pelosi" DO NOT OPEN IT!!  iF YOU DO YOU WILL SEE NUDE PHOTOS OF NANCY PELOSI.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 10, 2010, 07:22:17 AM
So . . .

Anyone have any thoughts about what quantitative easing is going to do to folks on the bottom end of the social strata?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 10, 2010, 07:30:46 AM
Thought #1

"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. There is no safe store of value." - Alan Greenspan



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 10, 2010, 07:54:46 AM
So . . .

Anyone have any thoughts about what quantitative easing is going to do to folks on the bottom end of the social strata?

Creating money that does not exist, buying things with money that does not exist OR not buying anything and adding that money to their portfolio and having the fed pay them interest on it only means that the banks win in the end. I'm not an economist but I see no real "benefit for the masses" by doing it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 10, 2010, 08:38:41 AM
So - why is it being done AND if our current Administration is so f*cking representative of the little guy (and hope and change and sh!t) - why isn't the President decrying this move?

This is bad all the way around.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 10, 2010, 09:59:14 AM
And now you do what they told ya

(sorry, not everyone will get that)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 10, 2010, 12:50:35 PM
Now they will . . .

RATM -Killing in the name - official video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkuOAY-S6OY#)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 10, 2010, 01:27:57 PM
Hah! I hope those with sensitive ears don't listen to the whole thing. I'm in anger management mode at work... Now playing on Pandora Iron Maiden - Tailgunner. (Hey TiFe... good song for a spin)

Speaking of Tail Gunners (okay it's a bad segway) I wonder how Obama military companions are doing in Indonesia. Lots of Islands to keep their eyes on there.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 10, 2010, 11:25:22 PM
guys you cant have a gold standard and be on a deficit spending spree.
 
Life is correct when he states both parties are the same. That is true, but in different ways.
The Dems are tax and spend. The Reps are borrow and spend.The results are the same.They both are adding to the deficit to pursue their chosen method.
The first step to sanity is to balance the budget. There is a solution, but neither party is really looking at it.
 
 
 
 
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 11, 2010, 07:29:12 AM
Oh ...they are looking at it, but it AIN'T pretty. We as AMERICANS have become so lulled into an actual belief that it is our Governments responsibility to ease the pain of personal decisions. So...when the answers are obvious, we balk and tell the politicians.... " Hit that 3rd rail and your finished!" We have become a nation of whiners. We need a tax break on everything... from buying a house, to buying a car, to buying a furnace, to having a baby. Why is it the whole nation's population has to share in your individual decision to buy or procreate?
 
Why did it even start to give tax abatements for the decisions of businesses? Why do we need crap like Turtle Tunnels and people seem to rejoice in PORK. Now I hear..oh that isn't that much money but.... why is it forgotten is "a PENNY saved is a penny.... you figure the rest" or my favorite... "A million Dollars here and a Million Dollars THERE and pretty soon we are talking about REAL MONEY." Pennies turn to dollars.
 
My thoughts only.... on the high end... the third rails...
 
if Social Security is to be ongoing... then EVERYONE pays in... no matter the income level or...if you are over the level of a set MEANS TEST, you forego Social Security payments until your income drops back below a certain level.... I have been told more than one time by Legislators and the SS themselves..... Social Security is insurance, not a retirement.
 
Revisit ALL the "WELFARE" programs and examine the NEED as opposed to just throwing it out to abuse.
 
Medicare Fraud and those similar abuses of programs like it.... NO messing around.... Severely punish those Doctors and accomplises in such.
 
I personally do not understand why a NON Government/elected entity has huge powers... EPA, The FEDERAL RESERVE etc...
 
How many of our children are actually EDUCATED by the Dept. of Education? Oh and I know they handle loans but...isn't that what our banks were for??
 
These are a few of the things that CAN be done but all you get is EXCUSES why not.
 
We have begun to EXPECT, DEMAND, and LOOK for our Government ( Read Every AMERICAN) to owe for individual decisions and responsibilities. We have allowed the Government body to get so big, even when we pay for a service, we can't get it.... Education is one of the things...if they did do their job, why are so many home schooling, cyber schooling or paying private schools?
 
Here is a good one.... why do we pay farmers NOT to grow crops or certain ones. Is that not his decision??? and check it out... the Department of Agriculture employes more people that we have FARMERS!  DOHHHHH!
 
My point... we throw money at everything and get a modicum of return at best. OUR problem right now is MONEY EMPLOYMENT MONEY JOBS MONEY...well you get the point. We have to quit ...at least after the first time.... bailing out ANYONE for their poor decisions, sans those not able to function mentally or physically. A one legged man/woman can type.
 
I go back to my close veteran friend who had his leg amputated, the other mangled as well as his hand and arm. He went to college and worked to retirement. He had incentive to do this if just to beat his physical impairments. A lot of us have lost incentive or never had it, we lost a sense of personal responsibility, and acceptance of the consequences. Our moral compass has changed and not for a good one. I do believe we are good at heart but we lack the courage to make the needed decisions so..remember this when you hear... " Hit that 3rd rail and your finished."  ;)   Economy, medical care, programs in general..it all is MONEY...debits and credits. Simple basics. We allowed it to get complicated.
 
I am not a mean person, but I get quite agitated when I feel someone elses hand in my wallet pocket and it isn't mine or my wife's.
 
 
 
 
 
guys you cant have a gold standard and be on a deficit spending spree.
 
Life is correct when he states both parties are the same. That is true, but in different ways.
The Dems are tax and spend. The Reps are borrow and spend.The results are the same.They both are adding to the deficit to pursue their chosen method.
The first step to sanity is to balance the budget. There is a solution, but neither party is really looking at it.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 11, 2010, 08:00:52 AM
I look at it as a large Chinese Checker Board. We replace the marbles every once in a while, but the problem ain't really the marbles - it's the board.

I agree Lifetime - we've built a structure we never should have, and we've become dependent on it. History provides us context for things like this (though not on this scale), but sadly, history isn't taught from a truthful perspective anymore, and folks don't bother to dig for the truth themselves, but rather accept what's fed to them. (Why would we be lied to by authorties?)

Social Security is a complete Ponzi scheme. (Google it and then look at Social Security.) Madoff went to jail, government gets a pass. I'll pay a tax to support senior citizens, but I'd rather control my own 'retirement.'

As for Medicaid / Medicare . . . I don't wanna start. I'll be typing all day.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 11, 2010, 03:17:31 PM
Hmmm.... Seems there was a bombing in Karachi, Pakistan about 500 yards from one of our remote offices. Evidently it took out a lot of windows and the shock wave damaged a number of servers there. The entire building has been evacuated. Can I write Obama a letter now?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 11, 2010, 11:25:54 PM
So assuming all the planets line up and America goes on the gold standard.
To make it work do all countries have to do the same?
 
If they don't can they trade U.S. currency for gold?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 12, 2010, 06:38:45 AM
I though we were still technically on the gold standard. Either way, we would have to have physical possession of the gold before it would do us any good in the event of an economic flushing. On the other hand with the revived discussion of eliminating the mortgage interest deduction (hope it doesn't pass) it's just going to make that many more people scared.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: gore range on November 12, 2010, 07:09:07 AM
....I'm reading the proposed mortgage deduction elimination only applies on mortgages over $500,000....

http://online.wsj.com/article/B10001424052http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703805004575606643067587042.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection748703805004575606643067587042.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703805004575606643067587042.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTWhatsNewsCollection)


....if all the recommendations were implemented now, the national debt would be eliminated by-




.




.




.



....2037.... :o



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 12, 2010, 07:54:40 AM
Thanks for the update on that. I guess I'm safe then if that's the target. A 500K mortgage is inconceivable to me. How much money do you have to make to even GET a 500K mortgage?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 12, 2010, 08:46:17 AM
The real Obama Administration (http://itmakessenseblog.com/2010/06/22/george-soros-2/)
 
Mmmm - yeah, I'm beginning to think so . . .
 
Quote
In a Der Spiegel interview in 2008, Soros advocates European-style socialism for America, “is exactly what we need now. I am against market fundamentalism. I think this propaganda that government involvement is always bad has been very successful — but also very harmful to our society.”
Soros’s answer to America’s problems involve more regulation and more government intervention in the marketplace. Soros pours billions of dollars into the following anti-USA causes.
  • Promoting the view that America is institutionally an oppressive nation  Promoting the election of leftist political candidates throughout the United States  Opposing virtually all post-9/11 national security measures enacted by U.S. government, particularly the Patriot Act  Depicting American military actions as unjust, unwarranted, and immoral  Promoting open borders, mass immigration, and a watering down of current immigration laws  Promoting a dramatic expansion of social welfare programs funded by ever-escalating taxes  Promoting social welfare benefits and amnesty for illegal aliens  Defending suspected anti-American terrorists and their abetters  Financing the recruitment and training of future activist leaders of the political Left  Advocating America’s unilateral disarmament and/or a steep reduction in its military spending  Opposing the death penalty in all circumstances  Promoting socialized medicine in the United States  Promoting the tenets of radical environmentalism, whose ultimate goal, as writer Michael Berliner has explained, is “not clean air and clean water, [but] rather … the demolition of technological/industrial civilization”  Bringing American foreign policy under the control of the United Nations  Promoting racial and ethnic preferences in academia and the business world alike
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 12, 2010, 08:47:17 AM
My questions are...is it the house or the land that is worth that much and if it is the house..... How many damned square feet do you need to actually need to live in? ??? McMansions are a waste.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 12, 2010, 08:50:12 AM
I know some do not like Glenn Beck but this week he has focused in on Soros and his ideas, lies and implementations. Fox has been approached ...I guess... by a rep of Soros, basically inferring, "if you continue to do this......" I want to see what happens.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 12, 2010, 09:34:58 AM
I find Glen Beck entertaining. I rarely listen to him though or any other talk radio shows. I wonder what part of the first amendment is going to get bent this time?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 12, 2010, 10:32:36 AM
What I find interesting about Beck is this..... He disclaims what he says so you are not to accept blindly... He encourages you to find him wrong and seek your sources. He is not the do all end all but what is interesting is..... HE offers those he talks about a chance to rebut anything he says and the Red Phone never even rang... His event in DC didn't come anywhere near the chaos the left said it would....So.... he may be an entertainer but.... NO ONE has challenged him .... one on one. Now, I find that interesting... even Soros sent a lacky to Fox to discuss them and the Beck Upstart. Beck is in public a lot.... he has public forums...why not approach him there?
 
I am not a Beck Acolyte but I do find it curious that the 37th wealthiest man in the world.... one who affects countries ...is blowing in the wind over Beck.... Don't you find that interesting as well??
 
 
 
 
 
I find Glen Beck entertaining. I rarely listen to him though or any other talk radio shows. I wonder what part of the first amendment is going to get bent this time?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 12, 2010, 11:01:56 AM
I find him more interesting than Rush who is far too overblown for my taste. IMO Rush is to conservatism what Michael Moore is to liberalism. Some people may not like that particular parallel but that's just how I see it. Beck deals more with things from the philosophical side while interjecting his own opinion. I see nothing wrong with that. Why Soros has his undies in such a bundle I don't know, but that's life as a public figure isn't it?


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 13, 2010, 12:08:42 AM
Either way, we would have to have physical possession of the gold before it would do us any good in the event of an economic flushing.

Physical posession!  The U.S gold reserve is at roughly 8133 tons that would be worth $356B at todays market price. There is about $8T worth of U.S. currency in circulation. The U.S. 2009 GDP was $14T.
Looks like were short some gold to support our currency.
In fact if it's estimated that all the gold ever mined would be worth $13T at todays prices.

So my question would be how do you move to a gold standard givin the gold supply could only support $350B in U.S. currency, which comes to $1400 per person, and nothing for businesses. Forget that 60% of our currency is held outside the U.S.







Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 13, 2010, 12:13:43 AM
How much money do you have to make to even GET a 500K mortgage?

before the meltdown the standard was 2.5 x annual gross income. So the answer is $200,000


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 13, 2010, 08:05:36 AM
Given the fact that the dwindling dollar has "artificially" (on purpose) inflated everything from Food to Homes to Cars as wellas precious metals like gold, silver and platinum..... I see no reason why the LEAD standard isn't practiced. What does anyone think would happen to the world outside our borders, if.... if, we decide not to arm anyone else??? Gold means nothing when compared to a loaf of scarce bread.... you can't drink oil. And if self protection isn't important to a nation..... then why do we have military and police.... instead of Gold miners or Bakers.??
 
When everything falls apart, the well fed will be the well armed. That is basic rules of nature... The last to survive will be those who can eat the remains or protect what they have. Try eating a bar of gold.
 
 
 
 
 
http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles/who-owns-worlds-gold/2491 (http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles/who-owns-worlds-gold/2491)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Spicoli on November 14, 2010, 07:16:49 PM
Quantitative Easing Explained
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/12/fed-animation_n_782929.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/12/fed-animation_n_782929.html)


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 15, 2010, 08:27:45 AM
I went to the YOU TUBE site to watch this and found some more good ones as well. I hate to say this but this boat is sinking faster than the bilge pump can pump this bilge fodder. Walmart did a study on a basic order of what was $50 worth of groceries a few months ago.... today the same is about $55 ... 10% higher and it ain't gonna stop..... so stock up on the Holiday food and the Christmas Presents.... the road will get rockier.
 
PS.... Quantitative Easing.... Hmmmm could this also describe a Penitentiary Love affair with Big Bubba and Vaseline??  :shocked:
 
Quantitative Easing Explained
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/12/fed-animation_n_782929.html[/url] ([url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/12/fed-animation_n_782929.html[/url])


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 15, 2010, 01:46:03 PM
QE2 (as it's known) is a stupid implementation of Keynesian economics. the folks that need relief 9the little guy) aren't going to get any. In FACT it's going to hurt 'us' and essentially benefit banks and possibly investors.

we're heading toweard Weimar republic territory. I suggest non-perishable foods and . . . lead . . . or buckshot - whichever. 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 18, 2010, 03:17:27 PM
Looks like Senate Bill S 510 (http://www.naturalnews.com/030418_Food_Safety_Modernization_Act_seeds.html) is going to get passed. I think we all need to plant a garden to signify what we think of this.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 18, 2010, 05:08:53 PM
But you see - it's being done inder the guise of protecting us from large evil food corporations that need to adhere to certain safety standards thus keeping us safe.

Those who control the food supply control the people.

I fucking hate these bastards.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 18, 2010, 05:55:01 PM
TSA Enhanced Screening Procedures Explained (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXDLQPfqc04#)
 
  Was thinkin' about this today. See - the government essentially controls the U.S. airspace - which is why Air Traffic Controllers are government employees and the TSA are present at the airports. If it were solely up to the privately owned airlines - we'd get to choose which one's had the best and least intrusive anti-terrorism measures and fly with them. But - sadly - the TSA made all this happen under the auspices of Homeland Security and ultimately W (thanks asshole for creatin' this mess) which granted the TSA these types of regulatory powers.

How does "voting" feel now?

You can choose which companies to fly with - but you don't get to choose who your tax money goes to do ya? But we're compelled to fund this stupidity . . . unless you believe Harry Reid's assertion that taxation is voluntary.

Our government is no longer on the peoples' side.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 18, 2010, 06:50:25 PM
the sky doesn't seem to be falling.
 
The food bill is directed at facilities, companies, farms ect. Like the Farm bill there are exemptions to reporting and inspections.
There is an exemption for operations making less than $500,000 in adjusted annual income.
So dont worry bout your food plot. Just make sure you don't harvest and sell more than $500K in tomatoes, peppers or bullshit.
 
read the bill: http://aging.senate.gov/crs/aging19.pdf (http://aging.senate.gov/crs/aging19.pdf)
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 18, 2010, 07:15:46 PM
And then there's this guy (http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/cabbagegate-ga-man-fined-5k-for-home-garden/19633544).


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 18, 2010, 08:08:00 PM
C'mon Puff - you're the Nixon-phile. What was it Earl Butz said to small farmers all those years ago? And why are we so closely following this (http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp)?
 
I don't think it's bullshit . . . .


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 18, 2010, 10:17:13 PM
And then there's this guy ([url]http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/cabbagegate-ga-man-fined-5k-for-home-garden/19633544[/url]).
And then there's this guy ([url]http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/cabbagegate-ga-man-fined-5k-for-home-garden/19633544[/url]).


thats a zoning beef.

While living in Fla. one of the homeowners restrictions was no backyard vegetable gardens. Container gardens were ok.
Boats were only allowed to be kept in the driveway only on weekends. They had to be either in the garage or stored the rest of the week.
Homeowners regs in Fla have the backing of the state law as you probably know. But like the Georgia case those are all local ordinances. Not Nat'l.

It seems that there are more gloom and doom  groups out there than ever. Fiction and non-fiction are spun out for directed consumption to achieve profit, power, lay blame, and duck responsibility.
Life I dont know about Earl Butz, but I think this is what P.T.Barnum meant about the masses. The bigger the improbability, the more believable it is. The right word in the right ear.
 



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 18, 2010, 10:19:48 PM
 :thumbsup:   


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: lifefeedsonlife on November 19, 2010, 07:27:33 AM
Quote
It seems that there are more gloom and doom  groups out there than ever. Fiction and non-fiction are spun out for directed consumption to achieve profit, power, lay blame, and duck responsibility.

Well - in Pennsylvania we're looking at utility increases again after January 1, quantitative easing ain't gonna help for shit on anything save for those who already have a lot of money, this Act passing through the Senate is likely to do what to the bottom line cost of food (?) - and oil prices tied to a weak dollar (made weaker through QE2) aren't likely to make the sky fall - - -

But it ain't exactly gonna help John Q. neither.

I'm the kind of guy who spots patterns - from odd stuff on the ceiling, to music, to behavior. I've been widening my context over time the better I get at it and I don't like what I'm seeing. I'm not trumpeting the apocolypse - I'm just saying I ain't happy . . . and I'm worried for what my children will inherit from a species too cocksure of its collective self.

In fact - to the Oligarchs - my kids don't exist, save as a statistic or small commodity.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 19, 2010, 07:55:48 AM
I have a few thoughts..... first....Do victory Gardens come to mind?.... IF and I say IF you livwe in a DECENT area of the city and have vacant lots... why not have a communal garden. We have one in our area that feeds maybe 10-15 families and the work is shared, as is the produce...
 
Now.... Has no one REALLY thought out this Gov't. Legalized GROPING of our wives, young children or any of those who think it is just NOT RIGHT.
 
For ONE year.... ONE ...(1)... no one flies sans maybe a business need after not arguing a car or bus. One year and the Government WILL be blamed for the loss of the ever increasing costs and fees of flying. All I have heard from SHEEPLE as they were being "carressed" was...if it saves our lives.... it is good. Well I am of the school tyhat if you trade security for any of your freedom, you will find yourself with neither.... I can't wait until the terrorist.. ( please note...they have had bombs placed inside their bodies with surgery already) to have a stick of C-4 or other ( maybe a bit about the size of a stick of butter) in the rectum or female orifice and just have it "innocuously", discovered..not meant to be blown just shown. How do you think this would end..Ahhhhh yessss the body cavity search of Us, our loved ones and even our children. How do you like it now? ??? How far do you want to take this while the "Terrorists" are dying... not of blowing up but of shear laughter. WE ARE CLOWNS or MARIONETTES, performing at the whim of and on the string controls of these pukes.
 
One year and I bet they ALL scramble to find a less BS way of doing this and YES.... even ask the Israelies to train us sans the total BS of PROFILING. In any WAR, you always look for the "ammunition" that damages the MOST with the least effort.... ONE BOMB/ONE CREW/ENOLA GAY Versus 10s of thousands of bombers/same amount of crews/ 100,000 bombs. That and one more, stomped a mudhole in Nippon's chest and in the long run... save a million of our soldiers.
 
I think the country of Israel should be approached and HONESTLY studied on their methods of Airport/Plane security for their passengers.
 
So...do we give up yet more freedom for this so called security or do we make a stand that actually means something. I am not going to be a Bovine herded down the shute to have the last thing in my life be a ballistic hammer touch my head. And, there is nowhere I need to go ...for a year that needs to have anything more than Terrafirma under my feet or tires. Oh..I have flown, though not recently and have many miles under my gluteous very maximus. Desert, jungle, rain forests, glades, seashores, mountains plus. foreign speaking people.... can be had, right here in North America... Spanish (Miami, Texas, Arizona and many other places) French ( Louisiana, Quebec... ) Greek, (try Tarpon Springs) Vietnamese ( Texas and a few colder states) and the list goes on... just find the enclaves. Snow/water skiing, snow boarding, sailing, cruises all the things you can do out side of NA but nearer to home...for ONE YEAR FOLKS. But no....we want to go globe hopping or feel the need to fly 1000 miles instead of maybe a road trip.
 
It is all a matter of MONEY and control. If the money dwindles, they will scurry to find a better way to do this NOW not in a decade. One year, deny the funds.... problem solved or at the very least.... within reason with no real loss of any freedoms but for a few minutes of eye contact and conversation.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 19, 2010, 08:09:00 AM
Does anyone, who is B1tching about increasing prices, see this as a byproduct of PRINTING WORTHLESS DOLLARS a billion at a time???? It isn't the scarcity of a lot of this..it is our DOLLAR IS WORTH SHIT and our own FED is doing us without lube. We have more wheat and corn that anyone ..... and we..yes we.... control a hell of a lot of food in the world... we open the markets and sell a hell of a lot of it OUTSIDE our borders...to help nations who can't grow the food. But... WE have enough to feed US. How much food do you think we sell places like Saudi Arabia... all they seem to have is dates and dried camel bladder. You can't grow crap in sand. AND you can't eat or drink O-I-L. The last man or woman with a can of sardines.... wins..to hell with a million barrels of oil. We pay farmers to NOT grow crops to control the price, but in the end, if you don't feed your own "family" over others, you are not a good provider. As in all things... if there is anything left, share with others. HOME...HOME First.
 
Gold, Fuel,  Electricity, Water, Food, Housing,Auto price,s haven't really gone up so much as the DOLLAR turning to toilet paper. Add to that, unemployment and no real Cost Of Living Raises.... Adjust for the value of the dollar and it shows this. We relied on the "trust" the whole world had in the Dollar Bill, but now we have allowed it to be undermined. People...just look in that mirror ...again.
 
 
Quote
It seems that there are more gloom and doom  groups out there than ever. Fiction and non-fiction are spun out for directed consumption to achieve profit, power, lay blame, and duck responsibility.

Well - in Pennsylvania we're looking at utility increases again after January 1, quantitative easing ain't gonna help for shit on anything save for those who already have a lot of money, this Act passing through the Senate is likely to do what to the bottom line cost of food (?) - and oil prices tied to a weak dollar (made weaker through QE2) aren't likely to make the sky fall - - -

But it ain't exactly gonna help John Q. neither.

I'm the kind of guy who spots patterns - from odd stuff on the ceiling, to music, to behavior. I've been widening my context over time the better I get at it and I don't like what I'm seeing. I'm not trumpeting the apocolypse - I'm just saying I ain't happy . . . and I'm worried for what my children will inherit from a species too cocksure of its collective self.

In fact - to the Oligarchs - my kids don't exist, save as a statistic or small commodity.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Amidala on November 19, 2010, 08:13:26 AM
re: the food issue... Michelle's garden would be impacted if this law was directed at small, private gardeners??  And.. if it did, don't you think that people would protest? I do. We are not that stupidly compliant, are we? ??? I don't think so.

The food supply DOES need to be protected. Many of the bacterial culprits are deadly, just deadly to many people, as we know. Food supply quality issues are common in the rest of the world and we are too spoiled by having easily available fresh food to become like those parts of the world.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 19, 2010, 09:03:47 AM
I question some of the "means" of describing how our cropslivestock are set in. There are too many variables involved to immediately know what we put in our mouth...even if you grow/raise it yourself. There are too many variables in just the air and water, let alone the soil. Free Range could be animals raised in the open land or just some allowed out of the pen for a while each day.... it is subjective.
 
IF you have restrictions in your own neighborhood or area...what stops you from maybe growing in another and share the results with the people supplying the land??? Hunters have done this for years... you hunt on a farmer's land and are successful...you share what you took with the owner. Almost like Barter and all it needs is a handshake. My wife grows a small garden on one of our son's properties.... We let the family renting the home, take what they need out of it.... it works for us both. Be creative.
 
 
re: the food issue... Michelle's garden would be impacted if this law was directed at small, private gardeners??  And.. if it did, don't you think that people would protest? I do. We are not that stupidly compliant, are we? ??? I don't think so.

The food supply DOES need to be protected. Many of the bacterial culprits are deadly, just deadly to many people, as we know. Food supply quality issues are common in the rest of the world and we are too spoiled by having easily available fresh food to become like those parts of the world.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: CindyLouWho on November 19, 2010, 03:57:16 PM
The food supply DOES need to be protected. Many of the bacterial culprits are deadly, just deadly to many people, as we know. Food supply quality issues are common in the rest of the world and we are too spoiled by having easily available fresh food to become like those parts of the world.
People get sick from the food our major farmers who supply major grocery store chains right here in America so I am trying to figure out how this is supposed to help any?  How many times do we here about salmonella or E. Coli in recalled foods?  Every other freaking day.  We have people from every organization under the sun and the educated military all over the world.  And safe gardening/farming is not instituted yet?  Why don't they just leave it alone and tell the small markets to please put up a sign stating "we are no responsible for food-borne illness related to foods purchased at this market" or something.  I could see this putting a damper on real organic vegetables.....not the stuff they like to call organic at the grocery stores but real organically farmed local stuff.  Organic and/or clean eating is pretty big right now.  Whatever.  I will still grow a garden and share with my family and friends and I don't care what the law says or how it is interpreted.  It's a Gd given right to grow my own food on my own land as far as I'm concerned.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 19, 2010, 09:26:34 PM
Cindy the problem is not home gardeners. The problem is the industrial food industry. Where there's money involved there are also shortcuts taken.
The oil industry had all kinds of regulations in place, that BP was aware of , but they still took shortcuts with unpleasant results.
90% of the U.S. export beef market is Canada,Mexico, Japan, and Korea. 2 cases of mad cow stopped all exports for a year, and in the case of Japan, Korea for 3 years. So the impact is greater than just those poisoned. Most of the newer  food related regulations deal with tracking contamination to the source thru the food chain.
As a consumer I have an expectation that the food I buy for self and family is safe. If that requires reasonable regs then fine. I have personally thought that those who cause food contamination thru negligence or greed should go to jail.
This legislation doesnt have anything to do with the family garden, or its produce.
 


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Puffin on November 19, 2010, 09:35:55 PM

For ONE year.... ONE ...(1)... no one flies sans maybe a business need after not arguing a car or bus. One year and the Government WILL be blamed for the loss of the ever increasing costs and fees of flying.

your mad at the government, so you take it out on the airlines. then blame the gov't.

what about all those non-gov't airline jobs lost.



Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 20, 2010, 07:53:06 AM
Wrong..... I am mad at anyone...business and people alike who will sit still and not say a damned thing about SECURITY being exchanged for Freedoms....because of the money or the ability to travel.
 
Our Government Bailed out the Car industry...what part of your head does or doesn't think they either will retink this crap or bail out the Airline industry. This whole thing reeks of Money and loss of freedom. I want you to think about flying a week AFTER some TSA or whomever, discovers PLAY DO shoved up the rectum or female orifice trying to board. How happy will you be to see body cavity searches on you and maybe your children over the age of 12 (for now). Is this what YOU want? ???
 
With all the intelligent (  :whoopdedoo: ) people we have in Science and Government today...don't you think they could have come up with a better system? Hell, we built an Atomic Bomb and put a man on the moon in less time than this was thought of. This was started in the Bush Admin.... Get real and I hope YOU and your family members won't EVER have to "bend over and spread 'em." for anyone but YOUR Doctor. There has to be a line drawn somewhere and not be sheeple because we might miss one holiday period with Gramma.
 
What I propose is not much more than someone who is encouraging EVERYONE to get the pat down, thus slowing the process and increasing delays but my idea is more forewarning to the Airlines and the Government. "Will the show go on without and audience?" and if not... don't you think there will be people willing to sit down and discuss WHY??? As it is... you are perfectly willing to either be "massaged" or be put into machines that are still being contested as to any health risk and known to have images saved.... Have at it then but.... not my Grand Daughters or even my wife. Safety...at the Governments instruction...tell that to the families of those who lost family members in the 70's because of GOVERNMENT push to get the "Swine Flu Shot". Yeah right. MAD ...hell yes...go back and reread my first paragraph.
 
 

For ONE year.... ONE ...(1)... no one flies sans maybe a business need after not arguing a car or bus. One year and the Government WILL be blamed for the loss of the ever increasing costs and fees of flying.

your mad at the government, so you take it out on the airlines. then blame the gov't.

what about all those non-gov't airline jobs lost.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: Lifetime on November 20, 2010, 08:03:37 AM
 
Oh yeah..... and those other non airline jobs.... rule is, that you can't keep a boat afloat if you patch just ONE hole and make another... true but, first study why the new holes are being made in the first place. This is all getting to be the process of robbing Peter to pay Paul... Lets stop doing stupid things and do the right things... PC be damned is a good start. Maybe we should have studied the Israelis and the Russians in their methods then found something in between we can live with. Israelis deal with a heightened state of terror EVERY DAY and seem to do an excellent job of airline screening and the Russians... in another post it showed how THEY deal with PIRATES... after boarding and removing the Pirates hostages...they handcuff the pirates to their ship..pull away and blow the crap out of it...no pirate ship...no pirates and no future problem with either. 
 

For ONE year.... ONE ...(1)... no one flies sans maybe a business need after not arguing a car or bus. One year and the Government WILL be blamed for the loss of the ever increasing costs and fees of flying.

your mad at the government, so you take it out on the airlines. then blame the gov't.

what about all those non-gov't airline jobs lost.


Title: Re: The Obama Administration
Post by: NightmarePatrol on November 20, 2010, 08:20:53 AM
I had the opportunity to attend a class about 5 years ago in Ohio. The class size was limited to 5 people and there were two of us in it. The other person worked for the IDF. The instructor was also a professor at Denison and as an academician was a awash in liberal viewpoints. My classmate mentioned that he was pulled out of line to go through additional screening, most likely because he was from the middle east. That led to a rant of sorts from the instructor about violating civil rights because of his appearance. His response was "Racial profiling works, we do it all the time because it is effective." He also cited the track record of El Al as validation. Can't argue with their track record.

What the TSA is doing is pretty inexc